VoltaGrid, Electric Generation Plant public comment period CANCELLED
July 7, 2026, 12 a.m. - August 13, 2026, 11:59 p.m.

Comment From: Kathleen Richardson

7/22/26 @ 5:17 PM

I am requesting the WA Dept of Ecology to hold PUBLIC HEARINGs on the Voltagrid application to build 14 methane-operated generators in order to provide energy to run a data center facility near Quincy, WA. There is much the public needs to understan...↓

No attachments

Comment From: HEATHER ADAMS

7/20/26 @ 1:34 AM

I am requesting that a public environmental impact hearing be held for this project. The hearing needs to include the impact of the transportation of fuel to the site.
No attachments

No attachments

Comment From: HEATHER ADAMS

7/20/26 @ 1:33 AM

I am requesting that a public environmental impact hearing be held for this project. The hearing needs to include the impact of the transportation of fuel to the site.
No attachments

No attachments

Comment From: Beth Braun

7/19/26 @ 8:57 PM

I am requesting that a public environmental impact hearing be held for this project. The hearing needs to include the impact of the transportation of fuel to the site.

No attachments

Comment From: Rosemary Moore

7/19/26 @ 5:54 PM

See attached file

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Rosemary Moore

7/19/26 @ 5:53 PM

I oppose VoltaGrid's application for an air quality notice of construction permit. Please schedule a public hearing on this proposal. First, adding 14 natural gas generators, makes this a significant fossil fuel project and requires greater scrutiny...↓ than a short public comment period. Second, VoltaGrid appears to be trying to circumvent Washington state's climate laws by claiming this is a short-term project, while implicitly relying on the Williams proposal to build a gas pipeline to serve the site, which will lock in gas pollution for decades. This continuing reliance on fossil fuels in makes the lifetime impact of the project much higher than the application implies. According to the SEPA Handbook: The total proposal must be identified before the categorical exemptions can be applied. 'Total proposal' means all interdependent parts of a proposal, including all proposed phases. This will limit the piecemeal review of projects, and allow an evaluation of all parts of a proposal. End of quote;Emphasis added. Third, Quincy is in the 92nd percentile nationally for particulate matter exposure. This project relies upon deliveries from 52 trucks per day to the site: 16 round-trips from diesel-powered semi-trucks delivering compressed natural gas and 10 round-trips from light-duty trucks. These diesel trucks will pollute the air with their fumes. The dust from the gravel roads is supposedly mitigated by VoltaGrid spraying a suppressant annually but there is no monitoring built into this proposal. Further, a pipeline is not a foregone conclusion, so there's no guarantee that this aspect of the project will be temporary. Fourth, Regardless, I am also concerned that there's no assessment of the cumulative impact. When you factor in wildfire smoke and fumes from the diesel generators in Vantage, adding 187,000 tons of CO2 and other pollutants will greatly increase pollution in the area and thus have health as well as environmental impacts. Finally, I am also extremely concerned that you are ignoring all of the upstream methane emissions. There's methane leakage from fracking, as well as from carrying it hundreds of miles in CNG tanks from BC to Quincy. Other gas projects such as Kalama Methanol and Tacoma LNG tried to minimize the upstream impacts too, but the DOE ultimately forced them to account for it, so there's solid precedent for requiring this now. In conclusion, this is a large, complex project that requires more than a 30 day comment period. I am asking for a public hearing and I urge you to deny the permit until the cumulative emissions can be studied.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Rosemary Moore

7/19/26 @ 5:50 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Rosemary Moore

7/19/26 @ 5:48 PM

I oppose VoltaGrid's application for an air quality notice of construction permit. Please schedule a public hearing on this proposal. First, adding 14 natural gas generators, makes this a significant fossil fuel project and requires greater scrutiny...↓ than a short public comment period. Second, VoltaGrid appears to be trying to circumvent Washington state's climate laws by claiming this is a short-term project, while implicitly relying on the Williams proposal to build a gas pipeline to serve the site, which will lock in gas pollution for decades. This continuing reliance on fossil fuels in makes the lifetime impact of the project much higher than the application implies. According to the SEPA Handbook, "The total proposal must be identified before the categorical exemptions can be applied. 'Total proposal' means all interdependent parts of a proposal, including all proposed phases. This will limit the piecemeal review of projects, and allow an evaluation of all parts of a proposal." Emphasis added. Third, Quincy is in the 92nd percentile nationally for particulate matter exposure. This project relies upon deliveries from 52 trucks per day to the site: 16 round-trips from diesel-powered semi-trucks delivering compressed natural gas and 10 round-trips from light-duty trucks. These diesel trucks will pollute the air with their fumes. The dust from the gravel roads is supposedly mitigated by VoltaGrid spraying a suppressant annually but there is no monitoring built into this proposal. Further, a pipeline is not a foregone conclusion, so there's no guarantee that this aspect of the project will be temporary. Fourth, Regardless, I am also concerned that there's no assessment of the cumulative impact. When you factor in wildfire smoke and fumes from the diesel generators in Vantage, adding 187,000 tons of CO2 and other pollutants will greatly increase pollution in the area and thus have health as well as environmental impacts. Finally, I am also extremely concerned that you are ignoring all of the upstream methane emissions. There's methane leakage from fracking, as well as from carrying it hundreds of miles in CNG tanks from BC to Quincy. Other gas projects such as Kalama Methanol and Tacoma LNG tried to minimize the upstream impacts too, but the DOE ultimately forced them to account for it, so there's solid precedent for requiring this now. In conclusion, this is a large, complex project that requires more than a 30 day comment period. I am asking for a public hearing and I urge you to deny the permit until the cumulative emissions can be studied.

No attachments

Comment From: Rosemary Moore

7/19/26 @ 5:46 PM

I oppose VoltaGrid's application for an air quality notice of construction permit. Please schedule a public hearing on this proposal. 1.Adding 14 natural gas generators, makes this a significant fossil fuel project and requires greater scrutiny than ...↓a short public comment period. 2.VoltaGrid appears to be trying to circumvent Washington state's climate laws by claiming this is a short-term project, while implicitly relying on the Williams proposal to build a gas pipeline to serve the site, which will lock in gas pollution for decades. This continuing reliance on fossil fuels in makes the lifetime impact of the project much higher than the application implies. According to the SEPA Handbook, "The total proposal must be identified before the categorical exemptions can be applied. 'Total proposal' means all interdependent parts of a proposal, including all proposed phases. This will limit the piecemeal review of projects, and allow an evaluation of all parts of a proposal." Emphasis added. 3.Quincy is in the 92nd percentile nationally for particulate matter exposure. This project relies upon deliveries from 52 trucks per day to the site: 16 round-trips from diesel-powered semi-trucks delivering compressed natural gas and 10 round-trips from light-duty trucks. These diesel trucks will pollute the air with their fumes. The dust from the gravel roads is supposedly mitigated by VoltaGrid spraying a suppressant annually but there is no monitoring built into this proposal. Further, a pipeline is not a foregone conclusion, so there's no guarantee that this aspect of the project will be temporary. 4.Regardless, I am also concerned that there's no assessment of the cumulative impact. When you factor in wildfire smoke and fumes from the diesel generators in Vantage, adding 187,000 tons of CO2 and other pollutants will greatly increase pollution in the area and thus have health as well as environmental impacts. 5.I am also extremely concerned that you are ignoring all of the upstream methane emissions. There's methane leakage from fracking, as well as from carrying it hundreds of miles in CNG tanks from BC to Quincy. Other gas projects such as Kalama Methanol and Tacoma LNG tried to minimize the upstream impacts too, but the DOE ultimately forced them to account for it, so there's solid precedent for requiring this now.
This is a large, complex project that requires more than a 30 day comment period. I am asking for a public hearing and I urge you to deny the permit until the cumulative emissions can be studied.

No attachments

Comment From: Rosemary Moore

7/19/26 @ 5:44 PM

I oppose VoltaGrid's application for an air quality notice of construction permit. Please schedule a public hearing on this proposal.
1. Adding 14 natural gas generators, makes this a significant fossil fuel project and requires greater scrutiny tha...↓n a short public comment period.
2. VoltaGrid appears to be trying to circumvent Washington state's climate laws by claiming this is a short-term project, while implicitly relying on the Williams proposal to build a gas pipeline to serve the site, which will lock in gas pollution for decades.
This continuing reliance on fossil fuels in makes the lifetime impact of the project much higher than the application implies. According to the SEPA Handbook, "The total proposal must be identified before the categorical exemptions can be applied. 'Total proposal' means all interdependent parts of a proposal, including all proposed phases. This will limit the piecemeal review of projects, and allow an evaluation of all parts of a proposal." Emphasis added.
3. Quincy is in the 92nd percentile nationally for particulate matter exposure. This project relies upon deliveries from 52 trucks per day to the site: 16 round-trips from diesel-powered semi-trucks delivering compressed natural gas and 10 round-trips from light-duty trucks. These diesel trucks will pollute the air with their fumes. The dust from the gravel roads is supposedly mitigated by VoltaGrid spraying a suppressant annually but there is no monitoring built into this proposal. Further, a pipeline is not a foregone conclusion, so there's no guarantee that this aspect of the project will be temporary.
4. Regardless, I am also concerned that there's no assessment of the cumulative impact. When you factor in wildfire smoke and fumes from the diesel generators in Vantage, adding 187,000 tons of CO2 and other pollutants will greatly increase pollution in the area and thus have health as well as environmental impacts.
5. I am also extremely concerned that you are ignoring all of the upstream methane emissions. There's methane leakage from fracking, as well as from carrying it hundreds of miles in CNG tanks from BC to Quincy. Other gas projects such as Kalama Methanol and Tacoma LNG tried to minimize the upstream impacts too, but the DOE ultimately forced them to account for it, so there's solid precedent for requiring this now.
This is a large, complex project that requires more than a 30 day comment period. I am asking for a public hearing and I urge you to deny the permit until the cumulative emissions can be studied.

No attachments

Comment From: Phil Ritter

7/19/26 @ 9:33 AM

Please schedule a public hearing.
This proposal appears to be inconsistent with state law.

No attachments

Comment From: Sophia C.

7/18/26 @ 10:30 PM

As a Washingtonian I have so much love for my home state, I absolutely do not want these natural gas generators built in this beautiful state that would only supply energy to AI data centers. We are demanding the rejection of this permit and asking f...↓

No attachments

Comment From: David Malcolm

7/18/26 @ 8:52 PM

The list of emissions is not complete. It omits the many tons of carbon dioxide which is a major driver of climate change. How will the state reach its goal of zero emissions in electrical generation by 2045 if projects like this proceed?

No attachments

Comment From: Gabriel Kennedy-Gibbens

7/18/26 @ 5:07 PM

I request the Department of Ecology to hold a public hearing on this project. I oppose gas power generation for data centers. Natural gas still releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, harming local air quality and contributing to climate change.

No attachments

Comment From: Gabriel Kennedy-Gibbens

7/18/26 @ 5:06 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Iris Antman

7/18/26 @ 3:21 PM

I strongly urge a public hearing on this proposed project. It sounds outrageous to me. Building more gas infrastructure while the world burns. And for VoltaGrid to market their product as 'clean' natural gas--it's false advertising. Allow the public ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Dan Streiffert

7/18/26 @ 10:39 AM

Climate change is the most significant threat to human existance that we have. We need to do everythig we can to reduce CO2 emissions. This project will increase the risk associated with climate change. This is a well documented fact.
Put the data ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Zachery Talbot

7/18/26 @ 10:12 AM

With all the knowledge that we have about the act of burning fossil fuels and its direct correlation to climate change, this is ridiculous to share with the public that they are being conscious of the environment. Washington state residents demand be...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Christopher Freelund

7/18/26 @ 9:29 AM

Why are we allowing corporations to build new LNG infrastructure when residents are being asked to go away from it and new housing isn't allowed to use it because of the environmental concerns. You approving this reeks of corruption and backdoor deal...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Christopher Freelund

7/18/26 @ 9:28 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Sridhar Krishnan

7/18/26 @ 7:46 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: M. I.

7/17/26 @ 8:22 PM

To the Washington State Department of Ecology, this comment is part of a demonstration of significant public interest against approving VoltaGrid Electric Generation Plant's air quality notice of construction (NOC) application without a public hearin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Joan Devries

7/17/26 @ 5:27 PM

It is imperative to hold a public hearing on this matter that concerns quality of living in the affected community. People deserve to have their voices heard.

No attachments

Comment From: Nancy Shimeall

7/17/26 @ 4:59 PM

My family and I strongly oppose VoltaGrid's application for an air quality notice of construction permit and demand a public hearing about this proposal. Quincy is in the 92nd percentile nationally for particulate matter exposure and adding 14 natura...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/17/26 @ 4:42 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/16/26 @ 4:39 PM

I've been reviewing the VoltaGrid LLC – QWA1 Electrical Generation Plant Notice of Construction application and have some questions and concerns about how the project's emissions and impacts are being evaluated.

1. Diesel Truck Emissions and Air Qu...↓ality
In the Revised Air Quality Impact Assessment (March 11, 2026) (Tables 6-2 and 6-3), VoltaGrid mentions 56 daily round-trip diesel truck deliveries to transport compressed natural gas (CNG) to the Quincy facility. However, I don't see any modeling or analysis of the emissions from these trucks (e.g., NOx, PM2.5, CO, or diesel particulate matter). How is Ecology accounting for the air quality impacts of these 56 daily diesel truck trips? Given that Quincy already faces challenges with wildfire smoke and agricultural burning, wouldn't these additional emissions contribute to local pollution? If these emissions aren't included in the modeling, how can we be confident that the project won't push Quincy closer to violating the NAAQS for PM2.5 or NO2?

2. Cumulative Impacts with Nearby Sources
The Revised NOC Application (January 2026) states (below Table 6):
"Nearby sources are not required to be considered in cumulative modeling."

Why are Vantage Data Centers' 61 diesel-fired emergency generators (located less than 2 miles away and authorized under Approval Order 23AQ-E056) not included in the cumulative impact analysis? Given that these generators emit NOx, PM2.5, and SO2, wouldn't their emissions combine with VoltaGrid's to affect local air quality? How does Ecology plan to ensure that the combined emissions from VoltaGrid's plant, the diesel trucks, and Vantage's generators won't exceed the NAAQS for PM2.5 or NO2, especially during wildfire season?

3. Upstream Methane Leakage and GHG Emissions
VoltaGrid's Project Emissions Summary only accounts for 3.5 tons/year of methane slip from the turbines. However, the gas is likely sourced from British Columbia's fracked gas fields, where methane leakage rates average 2.5–3% (per IEA Methane Tracker 2024).

How is Ecology accounting for the upstream methane leakage associated with the gas supply chain? Given that this could add ~87,500–100,000 tons/year of CO₂e, wouldn't excluding this underestimate the project's true climate impact? Does Ecology believe that WA's GHG reporting rules (WAC 173-441) require a full lifecycle emissions analysis for this project?

4. The "Short-Term" Contract and Climate Loopholes
In Section 4.9 of the Revised NOC Application, VoltaGrid states:
"The proposed project would contract with the local electric utility for a short-term period of less than five (5) years. As such, the GHG EPS law will not apply."

How does Ecology justify allowing a 187,108-ton/year CO₂e emitter to bypass WA's Greenhouse Gas Emission Performance Standard (RCW 80.80) simply by calling it "short-term"? Given that Williams Pipeline is planning a major expansion to Quincy by ~2030 (Williams Rockies Columbia Connector Project), isn't this project likely to become permanent? Would Ecology consider requiring VoltaGrid to commit to shutting down when the pipeline arrives to avoid locking in decades of fossil fuel use?

5. Public Participation and Transparency
The 30-day comment period seems like a short window for a project with such complex and far-reaching impacts. Given the unanswered questions about emissions, cumulative impacts, and climate loopholes. Would Ecology consider extending the comment period or holding a public hearing to ensure all concerns are addressed? Under WAC 173-400-171(3)(n), a hearing is required if there is significant public interest or potential air quality impacts—both of which seem to apply here.

No attachments

Comment From: Agatha Nolan

7/16/26 @ 9:48 AM

Please reject VoltaGrids permit to construct 14 Natural Gas Generators in Quincy, WA to power AI data centers. Our land, water, and energy resources are finite - and we have to stop wasting them on AI speculation. The construction of these power syst...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Adrienne Papermaster

7/16/26 @ 9:46 AM

Hello, I'm writing to request that the online public hearing be held so that the public has the opportunity to have input. The proposed project will have regional impact.

No attachments

Comment From: Curt Morris

7/09/26 @ 11:50 AM

July 8, 2026

TO: Jenny Filipy
Environmental Engineer
Washington Department of Ecology – Eastern Region Office
4601 N. Monroe Street
Spokane, WA 99205 1295

RE: Public Comment – VoltaGrid Electric Generation Plant Air Quality Notice of Construc...↓tion Application (NOC)

Dear Jenny Filipy:

The Port of Quincy respectfully submits the following comments regarding the Washington Department of Ecology's preliminary determination on VoltaGrid's Notice of Construction (NOC) application for an electric generation facility proposed east of Road O NW and north of Road L NW in Quincy.

The Port appreciates Ecology's comprehensive technical review of the project and acknowledges Ecology's preliminary determination that the proposal meets the requirements of Chapter 173 400 WAC. Ecology's analysis reflects a detailed evaluation of projected emissions—including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and formaldehyde—and the effectiveness of the proposed pollution control technologies. The inclusion of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) controls for nitrogen oxides and oxidation catalyst controls for carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds demonstrates that the applicant has incorporated modern emissions control systems consistent with Washington's air quality standards.

The Port also recognizes the broader regional context in which this NOC application is being considered. Quincy and the surrounding region continue to experience significant industrial, agricultural, and technology driven growth. As these sectors expand, the availability of reliable, firm, dispatchable energy resources remains essential to supporting existing employers, enabling new investment, and maintaining the stability of the regional electrical grid. While renewable energy resources are critical to Washington's long term energy strategy, firm generation continues to play an important role in ensuring operational reliability for industries that depend on consistent, uninterrupted power.

Our comments are not intended to advocate for any specific private development. Rather, the Port seeks to affirm the importance of Ecology's regulatory process and to express support for Ecology's analysis and preliminary determination as issued. Clear, consistent application of Washington's air quality regulations provides valuable certainty for public agencies, private developers, and regional stakeholders alike. Ecology's review of this NOC application helps reinforce that projects proposing modern emissions controls and meeting established regulatory thresholds can be evaluated transparently and objectively under existing law.

The Port of Quincy appreciates the opportunity to comment and thanks Ecology for its diligence in reviewing this application.

If you have any questions, please email us at publicaffairs@portofquincy.org.

Sincerely,

Port of Commissioners, Curt Morris, Brian Kuest, and Patric Connelly

Attachments:

Download

VoltaGrid, Electric Generation Plant public comment period CANCELLEDJuly 7, 2026, 12 a.m. - August 13, 2026, 11:59 p.m.

VoltaGrid, Electric Generation Plant public comment period CANCELLED
July 7, 2026, 12 a.m. - August 13, 2026, 11:59 p.m.