Jemena confirms in writing that works at this site could impact its high pressure Eastern Gas Pipeline. Combined with a grid connection, on-site solar, battery storage and the NSW wind power purchase agreement the Guidelines now require, that supports a layered energy precinct rather than reliance on any single source.
“We further confirm that your proposed work site could impact our high pressure gas main assets. Hence for the safety of your personnel and the security of our assets, no work is to be undertaken until confirmation is received that either your work site is a safe distance from our assets and/or a joint site meeting has been arranged to undertake your work across our facilities with safety.” Jemena Eastern Gas Pipeline, Before You Dig Australia response, 26 August 2026. Pipeline Section recorded as EGP Midline.
This is the strongest single item of evidence in the pack. It is an asset owner, in writing, placing a high pressure transmission pipeline in a position where it could be affected by works across this site. It is also a constraint: the pipeline that creates the opportunity also constrains the campus layout, through easements and the requirements of the Transport and Infrastructure SEPP.
| Eastern Gas Pipeline | Specification |
|---|---|
| Operator | Jemena Eastern Gas Pipeline (1) Pty Ltd and (2) Pty Ltd |
| Type | High pressure gas transmission pipeline, Longford to Sydney; commissioned 2000 |
| Length | 796.69 km mainline; 822.42 km including laterals |
| Normal operating pressure | 3,000 kPa to 16,550 kPa gauge |
| Capacity north | 350 TJ/day into New South Wales (existing capability) |
| Capacity south | Up to 200 TJ/day towards Victoria (bidirectional works completed 31 March 2026) |
| Local delivery | Cooma is an existing EGP delivery point; AEMO service point 1202009 |
| Section at this site | EGP Midline, per the Jemena BYDA response of 26 August 2026 |
| Seen on site | Jemena danger signage, a cathodic protection test point and a marker post reading 386.9 on the fence line, photographed 5 September 2026 |
The pipeline is not only on Jemena’s plan; it is marked on the holding by Jemena. A danger sign on the fence line names the Eastern Gas Pipeline, a cathodic protection test point stands on the holding, and a marker post is numbered 386.9, read as a chainage figure to be confirmed with Jemena. In one frame the danger sign and the 132 kV steel pole line share the same fence, which is the physical form of what Appendix B of the executive summary calculates from the cadastre.
Photographs 5 September 2026, reproduced without alteration other than cropping and resizing. Signage confirms the asset’s presence and ownership. It says nothing about pressure at the site, offtake capacity or the cost of a delivery point, which remain the Jemena commercial enquiry.
AEMO generator parameters give approximately 7.8 GJ/MWh for combined cycle, 8.8 GJ/MWh for reciprocating gas engines and 11.1 GJ/MWh for open cycle, so a screening band of 7 to 11 GJ/MWh sent out covers the plausible technology set.
| Continuous generation | Indicative gas rate | Equivalent daily volume | Share of EGP northbound capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 50 MW | 350 to 550 GJ/hour | 8.4 to 13.2 TJ/day | 2% to 4% |
| 100 MW | 700 to 1,100 GJ/hour | 16.8 to 26.4 TJ/day | 5% to 8% |
| 200 MW | 1,400 to 2,200 GJ/hour | 33.6 to 52.8 TJ/day | 10% to 15% |
| 300 MW | 2,100 to 3,300 GJ/hour | 50.4 to 79.2 TJ/day | 14% to 23% |
Screening assumptions only. These are not confirmed Jemena supply capacities; no capacity has been requested or offered. Share is calculated against the stated 350 TJ/day northbound capability of the whole pipeline.
A 300 MW campus running continuously on gas would consume between one seventh and one quarter of the entire northbound capability of a pipeline that serves New South Wales. That is not a realistic baseload proposition, and stating so is the point. Gas here is credible as a firming, resilience and bridging fuel at meaningful scale, and credible early, while grid augmentation runs on a longer timeline. It is not a substitute for a transmission connection.
The next generation of large-scale digital infrastructure cannot be considered apart from the energy system that supports it. The appeal of this site is not a claim that hundreds of megawatts are already available. It is the ability to investigate several complementary energy pathways in one location, at a scale that allows them to be designed together from the outset.
A 132 kV feeder, identified on site as Essential Energy’s Cooma to Bega line 97R, crosses the holding on double-circuit-capable poles with the second circuit position vacant, with 1,467 m of it inside Lot 1 DP500662. A 114 MW wind project already exports on this feeder, so available capacity and connection options require formal investigation.
Wind generation operates in the district: Boco Rock, 114 MW, exports north to Cooma on the same 132 kV line that crosses this holding, and the locality is a candidate Renewable Energy Zone. A future operator could investigate the wind power purchase agreements the NSW Guidelines now require. No generator has committed supply to this site.
The holding has room to investigate on-site solar at scale beside the compute load, with about 642 ha clear of the three energy corridors before constraints. The solar footprint and its output are feasibility items; no capacity is stated. The NSW Guidelines add a wind requirement: at least 40% of contracted renewable energy, by MWh, must be wind, on ten-year agreements with projects not yet at final investment decision.
Battery storage is now sized by policy rather than preference: 25% of grid load for two hours of demand flexibility, and storage equal to 25% of contracted generation capacity for four hours. Both envelopes are set out below. They are policy envelopes, not an engineered size.
The Jemena Eastern Gas Pipeline runs 1,348 m through Lot 1 DP500662. That creates an opportunity to investigate gas-supported resilience, emergency generation and firming, not a baseload gas proposition, and a design principle of avoiding routine diesel storage on site. Pressure, offtake, connection and terms are Jemena’s to answer, and none has been requested.
Regional wind, on-site solar, a grid connection, battery storage and gas-backed resilience, combined as one precinct and staged to match load growth. Not solar plus grid, which the Guidelines no longer reward on its own. A potential architecture, subject to feasibility.
No capacity is claimed. No particular megawatt capacity is represented as currently available at this site. Each pathway above is presented as a subject for formal technical and commercial investigation. The proposition is not that electricity is available here; it is that the compute load and its supporting energy ecosystem can be designed together, a precinct that brings its infrastructure with it. The electricity, gas and renewable energy questions in the FAQ set out what is known and what is not.
Two performance measures translate directly into a design envelope for the precinct. Both reward land, and both are easier to satisfy on this holding than on a constrained metropolitan site. This is probably the biggest change the Guidelines make to the proposition.
| Campus load | 25% flexible capacity | Two-hour energy equivalent |
|---|---|---|
| 50 MW | 12.5 MW | 25 MWh |
| 100 MW | 25 MW | 50 MWh |
| 200 MW | 50 MW | 100 MWh |
| 300 MW | 75 MW | 150 MWh |
The Guidelines set a hierarchy: load shifting first, then on-site or proximate renewable generation and storage, with the notice period agreed with the utility and AEMO able to instruct a reduction. Diesel back-up generators cannot be used for this measure. A metropolitan facility may struggle to find room for a battery of the size the Guidelines’ rules would imply beside its data halls; here it can be laid out from day one.
| Data centre | Indicative minimum storage power | Indicative storage energy, four hours |
|---|---|---|
| 50 MW | 12.5 MW | 50 MWh |
| 100 MW | 25 MW | 100 MWh |
| 200 MW | 50 MW | 200 MWh |
| 300 MW | 75 MW | 300 MWh |
Very approximate, and assumes contracted generation capacity is matched to campus load. The Guidelines link storage to the contracted generation portfolio rather than to IT load, so the final calculation will not be this simple. Storage can be battery or pumped hydro, part of a hybrid asset or separate, and on-site storage provided for demand flexibility under measure 9 can count towards this measure. No storage, generation or PPA exists; this is a design envelope for feasibility.
The AEMC finalised its data centre advice to energy ministers on 28 July 2026. It recommended that data centres surrender renewable energy certificates from new additional generation, demonstrate that their demand is backed by new firm capacity, register as market participants, and enter connection agreements that encourage demand shifting and co-location with generation.
A site that can host its own generation and firming on the same title is positioned for that framework rather than exposed to it. Separately, electricity generating works have a clearer rural planning pathway than the data centre use itself, which means the energy component may be able to progress on a different and faster track. That is set out on the planning page.
Principle 3 of the August 2026 NSW Data Centre Guidelines is the most prescriptive thing in the document, and it is where land area stops being an abstraction. Performance measure 13 asks a proponent to contract additional renewable generation in NSW, with:
For most sites the binding constraint on that measure is somewhere to put the generation. This holding has the room, on the same title, and on-title solar and storage are additional by definition. The district is also demonstrably wind-viable, which is what the 40% component needs.
Ten-year offtake agreements over pre-FID generation, with four-hour storage attached, are a material commercial commitment and are not costed anywhere in this pack. The site offers the physical capacity to satisfy measure 13. It has not satisfied it, and presenting proximity to generation as an advantage while passing over the obligation that comes with it is a selective reading a counterparty will notice.
The question for Jemena is now specific: at what pressure, flow rate and connection cost could the nearby pipeline support 25 MW, 50 MW, 100 MW or potentially greater generation? Around it sit the pipeline alignment and easement position relative to the developable area; feasibility of a new industrial delivery point at or near Rock Flat; available pressure and permissible delivery volume at the demand profiles above; lateral, metering and regulation requirements; connection cost and timeframe. This is a commercial conversation with the Jemena EGP team, separate from the Before You Dig safety channel.
Gas is a defined feasibility workstream, and a valuable one. It is not one of the four gating questions: the project does not necessarily fail if gas cannot be developed, whereas it almost certainly fails as a 100 MW plus opportunity without grid capacity or diverse fibre. Water now ranks ahead of gas in the feasibility priority list. The Guidelines page sets out that ranking.
Presence and position only. No electrical capacity, gas capacity, telecommunications service, water supply or planning approval is claimed, secured or offered.
Rock Flat is seeking engagement with experienced digital infrastructure, energy and investment partners to undertake the next stage of technical and commercial feasibility. Detailed title, infrastructure, utility and commercial information is available to qualified parties.