The Apollo Power Generation Facility siting case — 350 MW net behind-the-meter gas generation plus ~119.5 MW / 239 MWh of battery storage, certified by automatic approval on the accelerated letter-of-notification track with no public hearings, and expressly barred from interconnecting to the grid

Record · Utility siting

The Apollo Power Generation Facility siting case — 350 MW net behind-the-meter gas generation plus ~119.5 MW / 239 MWh of battery storage, certified by automatic approval on the accelerated letter-of-notification track with no public hearings, and expressly barred from interconnecting to the grid

apollo-power-generation-facility

[verified]

meta

subject The Apollo Power Generation Facility siting case — 350 MW net behind-the-meter gas generation plus ~119.5 MW / 239 MWh of battery storage, certified by automatic approval on the accelerated letter-of-notification track with no public hearings, and expressly barred from interconnecting to the grid
kind opsb-siting-case
case_number 25-0973-EL-BLN
captured_for issue 1437 (epic 1433, readiness(bowling-green) — the power instrument)
extracted_at 2026-08-01
method Read verbatim from the captured Staff Report of Investigation's own text layer (pdftotext -layout). Page citations are the Staff Report's own printed page numbers, which restart at 1 after the cover letter and maps. Where the issue body's research notes and the primary text disagree, the disagreement is stated rather than silently applied.
sources
- primary
  - - file data/documents/grid/bowling-green/power-siting-board-ohio-020326.pdf
    - what OPSB Staff Report of Investigation, 25-0973-EL-BLN, filed 2026-01-27
- secondary
  - - url https://opsb.ohio.gov/news/opsb-authorizes-construction-of-wood-county-power-plant
    - what OPSB news release, 2026-02-03 (carries the wrong case suffix — see case_number_correction)
  - - url https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/puco.ohio.gov/empliibrary/files/OPA/Mapping/OPSB/Solar%20Facilities%20Map/Natural_Gas_Map_and_Stats.pdf
    - what OPSB "Gas Generation & CHP Case Status" table, produced 2026-07-22
  - - url https://www.williams.com/expansion-project/apollo-power-generation-project/
    - what the applicant's own project website, named in the Staff Report at p. 9

case_number_correction

tag [verified]
correct 25-0973-EL-BLN
asserted_in_issue 25-0973-EL-BGN
statement Issue 1437, the BOSC site profile, and OPSB's own press release all give the case as 25-0973-EL-BGN; the docket is 25-0973-EL-BLN. The Staff Report's caption reads "In the Matter of the Letter of Notification Application of Will-Power OH, LLC ... Case No. 25-0973-EL-BLN" (p. 1 of the cover letter), the identifier block repeats it ("Case Number: 25-0973-EL-BLN", Staff Report p. 1), it appears in the footer of every one of the 22 Staff Report pages, and the DIS electronic-filing stamp on the final page reads "Case No(s). 25-0973-EL-BLN". OPSB's news release of 2026-02-03 directs readers to search "25-973-EL-BGN" — wrong suffix and a dropped leading zero — but OPSB's structured gas-fleet case table lists it as 25-0973-EL-BLN in a column where sibling Licking County rows are genuinely -BGN, so the table is discriminating between the two tracks rather than defaulting.
why_it_matters BLN is the Board Letter of Notification — the accelerated track under R.C. 4906.03 and O.A.C. 4906-6 that carries automatic approval unless suspended. BGN is the ordinary generation-certificate track, which is adjudicated. The suffix is the very fact the issue is about: it is the reason there were no public hearings. Citing -BGN describes a proceeding that did not happen.

applicant

tag [verified]
name Will-Power OH, LLC
address 2000 Commerce Dr, Pittsburgh, PA 15275
contact Andy Woerner
address_source The address and contact are read from the Ohio EPA air permit chain (data/documents/oepa/bowling-green/air/), which names the same entity; the Staff Report names the applicant but not its address.
corporate_parent
- tag [reference]
- statement Will-Power OH, LLC is reported as an affiliate of The Williams Companies (NYSE: WMB). The Staff Report does not say so. What it does say (p. 9) is that "The Applicant maintains a public website for the project at https://www.williams.com/expansion-project/apollo-power-generation-project/" — i.e. the OPSB record places the applicant's official project communications on Williams' corporate domain, which is strong corroboration but is not the same thing as a filed statement of ownership. The ownership chain itself is [open]; see registrations_gap below.

customer

tag [verified]
name Liames, LLC
statement "Liames, LLC ('Liames' or 'customer') would be the customer of the Applicant's electric power generation. The customer intends a data center on its campus. The customer's facility is currently under construction and is adjacent to the proposed electric power generation facility." (Staff Report p. 1.) The OPSB news release repeats it: "Liames, LLC will consume the power generated by the power plant."
meta_identification
- tag [reference]
- statement Neither the Staff Report nor the news release names Meta. The Liames-to-Meta identification is carried in this repo's Bowling Green record (data/extracted/bowling-green/data-centers.md) on Meta's own 2025-04-09 announcement plus the deed/rezoning record. Do not upgrade it here — the siting docket documents a customer named Liames, LLC and nothing more.

capacity

net_output_mw
- tag [verified]
- value 350
- statement "a 350 megawatt (MW) net capacity electric generation plant" (Staff Report p. 1). This is the certified figure and it is a hard cap: Condition 14 reads "The facility shall be operated in such a way that the output of the facility does not exceed 350 megawatts."
gross_capability_mw
- tag [verified]
- value 491
- statement "The generation units would be capable of producing up to 491 MW at design atmospheric weather conditions. At those weather conditions, various generation units may be derated to still account for onsite equipment load and unplanned equipment downtime to still achieve a maximum 350 MW net output." (Staff Report p. 2.) A 491 MW figure is NOT a second capacity claim and must never be reported as the plant's size.
- margin_over_certified_output
  - tag [inference]
  - statement 491 / 350 = 1.40, so the installed fleet is about 40% larger than the certified net output. The Staff Report names both figures and names what the margin absorbs — parasitic onsite equipment load, derate at design atmospheric conditions, and unplanned downtime — but never states the ratio. The arithmetic is ours.
bess
- tag [verified]
- power_mw 119.5
- energy_mwh 239
- container_count ~31
- container_model Tesla Megapack 2XL
- statement "The Applicant has been refining its design and layout and would utilize approximately 119.5 MW of BESS capacity (for delivery of 239 MW-h of energy). This BESS equipment would consist of approximately 31 Tesla Megapack 2XL battery energy storage containers with inverters." (Staff Report p. 2.) The widely reported "~120 MW battery" rounds the power rating and drops the energy rating, which is the half that says what the storage is for. Both are recorded here because they answer different questions: 119.5 MW is how hard it can push, 239 MWh is how long it can push for.
- duration
  - tag [inference]
  - statement 239 MWh / 119.5 MW = 2.0 hours — two hours AT THE BATTERY'S OWN 119.5 MW rating, which is 34% of the plant's 350 MW certified output. It is NOT two hours of the plant's output; discharged against the full 350 MW the same 239 MWh would last about 41 minutes, and the BESS is not rated to deliver 350 MW in any case. The Staff Report states the purpose in its own words — "to accommodate fluctuations in demand from the associated Liames facility and to mitigate any unplanned outages" — which is a demand-following and ride-through role, not a supply resource. The division is ours; the framing is the record's.
- purpose
  - tag [verified]
  - statement "to accommodate fluctuations in demand from the associated Liames facility and to mitigate any unplanned outages" (Staff Report p. 2).
oversizing_note
- tag [inference]
- statement The 350 MW net certified here against the ~180 MW peak disclosed for the campus's initial phase is the ~2x oversizing this repo already tracks as a Phase-2 signal (see the it_load citation on the bowling-green SiteProfile and Meta's 2026-01-07 trustees letter). Nothing in the Staff Report states a customer load, a phase plan, or a reason for the margin, so the inference is ours and stays ours. The record's own explanation for surplus capability is the 491-vs-350 derate margin, which is a different and smaller thing.

generation_equipment

tag [verified]
primary_units
- - count 2
  - model Siemens SGT-800
- - count 3
  - model Siemens A35
- - count 10
  - model Solar PGM 130
- - count 6
  - model Siemens SGT-400
- - count 6
  - model Caterpillar 3520
turbine_total 21
reciprocating_engine_total 6
reconciliation
- tag [verified]
- statement 21 turbines (2 + 3 + 10 + 6) and 6 reciprocating engines. The Ohio EPA air permit independently describes the facility as "(6) natural gas fired engines and (21) natural gas fired turbines" and groups the emissions units in exactly these five families, so the two agencies' records reconcile unit for unit. The model names differ slightly between them (A35/SGT-A35, PGM 130/Titan T-130, 3520/G3520); these are the same machines under vendor and permit naming.
duty_split
- tag [verified]
- statement "gas combustion turbine generator sets to support baseload power demand and quick start reciprocating engines and battery energy storage container units to support the variable energy demands of the customer's data center facility" (Staff Report p. 2).
fuel
- tag [verified]
- statement "The combustion turbines and reciprocating engines would use pipeline natural gas as the exclusive fuel." (Staff Report p. 2.)
solar_is_not_solar
- tag [verified]
- statement READ THE FOOTNOTE BEFORE COUNTING ANY RENEWABLE CAPACITY HERE. Staff Report footnote 1: "Solar Turbines, Inc. ('Solar') is a subsidiary of Caterpillar, Inc. Solar is a brand name and not solar photovoltaic equipment." Ten of the 21 turbines are "Solar" units and every one of them burns natural gas. Wood County already carries a live solar-capacity conflation trap in this repo (Bowling Green's municipal solar field is 20 MW AC, not the ~125 MW that an AMP Phase II conflation produces); a text search that treats "Solar PGM 130" as photovoltaic would manufacture a third one. The same footnote records that the applicant had initially specified Baker Hughes LT16 turbines and switched to the PGM 130 "due to supply chain issues."
portable_generator
- tag [verified]
- statement Space is reserved for a megawatt-scale portable unit "such as the Solar Mobile Turbomachinery (SMT) 130 mobile combustion turbine generator set ... brought in and utilized during outage events," and Staff's recommendation "includes authorization for the intermittent use" of it (Staff Report p. 3). Condition 34 requires any use of it to be reported in the annual compliance report — so there is a certified, dispatchable unit here whose running hours are a filed record rather than a modelled assumption.
emergency_generators
- tag [verified]
- count 2
- model Caterpillar C32
- rating_kw_each 1000
- fuel ultra-low sulfur diesel
- statement "The emergency and black start generation would come from two Caterpillar C32 diesel generators rated each at up to 1,000 kilowatts (kW) ... The diesel generators are only for startup of the Apollo facility and would not directly support the customer's electric load demand needs." (Staff Report p. 3.) These are the PLANT's black-start set. They are not the data center's backup fleet, and they must not be read into the campus's genset dimension — the bowling-green SiteProfile deliberately carries no gensets for the data center because none has been disclosed for it.
electrical_system
- tag [verified]
- statement "an internal BTM substation, switching substation, busses, circuit breakers, switchgear, transformers, and gen-tie lines. The generator sets would be connected to a series of approximately 18 transformers that would increase the voltage to 34.5 kV. The electric power would then be delivered through a series of 34.5 kV circuits to the customer." (Staff Report p. 3.) Note the delivery voltage: 34.5 kV is a distribution class, well below the 100 kV threshold at which OPSB jurisdiction over a transmission line attaches.

grid_posture

tag [verified]
statement "The facility would operate in behind the meter (BTM) mode where its electric output is dedicated to a single customer's electric load and would not be physically connected to the electric grid." (Staff Report p. 1.) And at p. 10: "The proposed facility would not be connected to the regional grid and would instead serve the load of the Applicant's customer. If the Applicant plans to export power to the bulk power system in the future, a supplemental application must be filed with the Board."
enforced_by
- Condition 15 — "The Applicant shall not have a physical or electrical interconnection with the Transmission System pursuant to the PJM Interconnection, LLC Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT), Part IV or OATT Part VI."
- Condition 16 — export to the bulk power system requires both "(a) New service request for generation interconnection with PJM Interconnection, LLC or the current regional transmission organization operating in Ohio" and "(b) ... supplemental approval from the Board."
why_it_matters
- tag [inference]
- statement This is the cleanest instrumented example in the network of the self-power posture: 350 MW of dispatchable generation certified with an express prohibition on touching the grid it sits beside. The consequences follow from the prohibition, not from us — a plant with no OATT interconnection has no PJM capacity obligation, no interconnection queue position, and no transmission service to be curtailed, and the load it serves never appears in the serving utility's retail sales. The BOSC bowling-green grid record already models the campus's grid draw as ~0 for this reason. Nothing in the Staff Report discusses market or tariff consequences; the reasoning is ours.

process

tag [verified]
filing_type Letter of Notification
application_filed 2025-11-05
inspection_date 2026-01-07
staff_report_date 2026-01-27
recommended_automatic_approval_date 2026-02-03
waiver_requests None
staff_assigned
- A. Conway
- M. Bellamy
- M. Butler
- T. Crawford
- R. Gonzales
- J. Patmon
- J. Stottsberry
- S. Richards
statement "The accelerated certificate application in this case is subject to an automatic approval process as required by Ohio Revised Code (R.C.) 4906.03 and Ohio Administrative Code 4906-6. Staff recommends this application for automatic approval February 3, 2026, unless suspended by the Board, an administrative law judge, or the chairperson or executive director of the Board for good cause shown. If suspended, the Board must render a decision on the application within 90 days from the date of suspension." (Executive Director Michael Williams, cover letter to the Board.) Board members were asked to raise objections "at least four business days prior to February 3, 2026."
what_the_record_shows_and_does_not
- tag [verified]
- statement The record establishes the mechanism — an accelerated track whose default outcome is approval on a pre-announced date absent an affirmative suspension — and it establishes that the mechanism ran to that default. It does not characterize the process, and neither does this record. Local criticism of the no-hearing track is attributed reporting and belongs in the story layer, not here.
public_interaction
- tag [verified]
- statement "The Applicant notified neighboring property owners and tenants regarding the proposed project, provided public notice in The Sentinel Tribune, and delivered copies of the application to local officials and the local library ... Several public comments have been filed in the docket for this case. The comments can be viewed in the online case record." (Staff Report p. 9.)
comment_count
- tag [open]
- statement The Staff Report says "Several public comments" and gives no number. Issue 1437 cites 14 resident opposition comments from press coverage — that figure is [reference] and is NOT corroborated here. It also must not be conflated with the 42 numbered comments answered in the Ohio EPA air permit's Response to Comments: those were filed in a different proceeding, before a different agency, on a different instrument, months later. Two proceedings, two comment files. Lead APOLLO-OPSB-COMMENT-COUNT.

timeline

tag [verified]
construction_start February 2026 (proposed, upon Board authorization)
material_delivery_start March 2026
large_equipment_delivery_start June 2026
partial_in_service ~150 MW around July 2027
full_in_service around August 2027
construction_complete December 2027
statement Staff Report p. 3 and p. 5. Note the partial-service figure: "approximately 150MW" around July 2027, with the remainder around August 2027 — a phased energization the secondary accounts flatten into a single 2027 date.
construction_deadline
- tag [verified]
- statement Condition 2 — "The certificate shall become invalid if the Applicant has not commenced a continuous course of construction of the proposed facility within three years of the accelerated application approval date, unless the Board grants a waiver or extension of time." i.e. a 2029-02-03 outside date.
construction_status
- tag [open]
- statement OPSB's gas case-status table produced 2026-07-22 lists Apollo WITHOUT the "Under Construction" footnote that marks three sibling Licking County projects on the same table. Whether that is a status signal or a maintenance lag in the table is not established, and Condition 3 requires the applicant to docket the actual construction-start date — which is in the access-blocked docket. Do not infer that construction has or has not begun. Lead APOLLO-CONSTRUCTION-START.

land

project_area_acres
- tag [verified]
- value 146.84
- statement "The approximately 146.84-acre project area is situated within industrial property" (Staff Report p. 3). This supersedes the "147 ac" carried as [reference] in issue 1437 — same number, now read off the filing.
acreage_discrepancy
- tag [verified]
- statement THE STAFF REPORT GIVES THREE DIFFERENT ACREAGES AND THEY ARE NOT THE SAME BOUNDARY. Land Use (p. 3) says the project area is ~146.84 acres. Transportation (p. 5) says the project "would be located on approximately 163 acres." Surface Waters (p. 14) says the wetland and surface water delineation covered an "approximately 165.11-acre study area, including the gen-tie corridor." The 165.11 figure states its own scope; the 163 does not. Cite 146.84 for the project area and say so; do not average them and do not present 163 as a correction.
agricultural_impact
- tag [verified]
- affected_acres 142.12
- agricultural_district_acres 75.143
- statement "Approximately 142.12 acres of agricultural land would be affected by the project, including approximately 75.143 acres classified as Agricultural District Land. This designation would not be retained, as the parcel would be incorporated into a permanent electric generation facility." (Staff Report p. 3.)
- share_of_project_area
  - tag [inference]
  - statement 142.12 / 146.84 = 0.968, so about 96.8% of the project area is farmland being converted, and roughly half of that (75.143 ac) carries an Agricultural District designation it will lose. The Staff Report gives both acreages and neither ratio. Note the denominator: this uses the 146.84-acre project area, not the 163 or 165.11 figures the same report gives for other boundaries — see acreage_discrepancy above.
location
- tag [verified]
- statement Middleton Township, Wood County, near the intersection of Mercer Road and Middleton Pike (SR 582), near I-75. The address on the air permit is 11902 Middleton Pike, Bowling Green, OH 43402. The western perimeter abuts a TC Energy d/b/a Columbia Gas Transmission pipeline.
nearest_receptors
- tag [verified]
- statement "The closest residence is located approximately 587 feet from the edge of the perimeter access road. Within 1,000 feet of the project fence line, there are two residences; no parks, churches, cemeteries, wildlife management areas, or nature preserves are located within this distance. Both residences are located within 1,000 feet of the electrical generating equipment. Additional residential properties within the industrial property have been acquired by the Applicant's customer and have been, or would be, demolished." (Staff Report p. 4.) The last sentence is the one worth holding onto: the customer — Liames, the land assembly — has been removing the receptors that would otherwise sit closest to the plant.
zoning_and_planning
- tag [verified]
- statement Industrially zoned, within a Targeted Economic Development Area in the Wood County Plan Commission Land Use Plan, and within Middleton Township's SR 25 and SR 582 Overlay Zone. Staff concludes the project is consistent with both.

aesthetics

tag [verified]
statement A ~3-mile Visual Study Area with 33 identified visually sensitive resources — 19 high-density residential areas, four unincorporated communities, two cities or villages, two transportation corridors (I-75 and SR 582), and six recreational or trail resources. Greatest visual change within 0.5 miles at I-75, SR 582, the unincorporated community of Dunbridge, and a nearby residential neighborhood. Mitigation is "mounding, berming, and landscaping." Staff concludes minimal aesthetic impact. (Staff Report p. 4.) Tallest permanent structures are the ~60-foot exhaust stacks and ~79-foot gen-tie supports (p. 13).

cultural_resources

tag [verified]
statement Phase I investigation identified three previously known archaeological sites and two Ohio Genealogical Society cemeteries within the project area, all recommended ineligible for the National Register, plus one newly discovered archaeological site, also recommended ineligible. Within the area of potential effect: four previously identified historic resources (including the two cemeteries) and **104 newly identified historic resources**. The consultant recommended that two historic resources and one cemetery are POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE for NRHP listing. (Staff Report p. 4.)
open_item
- tag [open]
- statement "The findings were submitted to the Ohio Historic Preservation Office (OHPO). The OHPO has not responded to the consultant in concurrence yet. Subject to the OHPO's confirmation, Staff agrees with the findings of the Applicant's consultant." (Staff Report p. 4.) So the cultural-resources clearance rests on a concurrence that had not been given when the certificate issued, and no condition requires it to be docketed. Whether OHPO has since concurred is not established. Lead APOLLO-OHPO-CONCURRENCE.

water_use

tag [verified]
statement "The facility would not have any steam generation or large-scale water use for cooling." (Staff Report p. 1.) Cooling is "a closed-loop water/glycol system ... cooled using either a simple fin fan cooler design or a closed-circuit cooling tower, which is anticipated to have a water volume of approximately 1,375 gallons. This water would not discharge, or blow down, to any sewers or streams." (p. 12.)
annual_volumes
- equipment_cleaning_gal_per_year 10000
- hydrant_testing_gal_per_year 18000
supply
- tag [verified]
- statement Fire-protection and potable water from the Northwestern Water and Sewer District (NWWSD); sanitary waste to an NWWSD sewer collection system; "No use of on-site groundwater is proposed" and no groundwater wells. The applicant intends to extend water and sewer lines, which "may require permits to install from Ohio EPA" (Staff Report pp. 6-7, 12).
bearing_on_the_water_story
- tag [inference]
- statement A 350 MW thermal plant next door to the campus that consumes essentially no water is a real and somewhat counterintuitive finding, and it matters to the Bowling Green water plan (issue 1439): the NWWSD supply tension at this site is driven by the DATA CENTER, not by its power plant. Apollo's whole documented draw is a ~1,375-gallon closed loop, ~10,000 gal/yr of equipment cleaning and ~18,000 gal/yr of hydrant tests. The inference — that Apollo is not a material claimant on the NWWSD contract — is ours; the volumes are the record's.

wells_and_groundwater

tag [verified]
statement "The ODNR review indicated there are records of 54 water wells drilled within one mile of the project area. The wells range in depth from 32 feet to 210 feet with an average depth of 79 feet. Sustainable yield data reported from 8 of these wells indicates a 25 gallon per minute average." ODNR concluded "(1) the construction of this project is not expected to have significant impacts on public or private well yields and (2) the construction of the facility is not expected to pose a significant groundwater contamination risk," and Staff agreed. (Staff Report pp. 6-7.) Condition 23 requires "a minimum setback of 50 feet from any active water well."
source_correction
- tag [verified]
- statement Issue 1437 describes this as an "Applicant well study." It is not. It is an ODNR review, requested by the applicant, transmitted as an ODNR review letter dated 2025-11-03 and reaching the docket through the applicant's response to Staff's SECOND data request (Staff Report footnotes 2 and 8). The distinction is the difference between a developer's consultant clearing its own project and a state resource agency doing so, and it runs the right way for the applicant — so it should be stated accurately rather than downgraded by accident.
swpa_discrepancy
- tag [verified]
- statement THE STAFF REPORT LOCATES THE NEAREST SOURCE WATER PROTECTION AREA TWICE, AND THE TWO STATEMENTS DISAGREE ON BOTH DISTANCE AND DIRECTION. Page 6: "The nearest SWPA (5-year time-of-travel) is approximately 1,500 feet south of the proposed project." Page 12: "One Drinking Water Source Protection Area (SWPA) is located approximately 0.85-mile southeast of the project area." 1,500 feet is ~0.28 miles. Both passages conclude no SWPA impact, and Ohio EPA does not restrict energy generation within an SWPA in any case, so the conflict does not change the outcome — but neither figure may be cited as the distance without noting the other. Lead APOLLO-SWPA-DISTANCE.

geology

tag [verified]
statement Uppermost bedrock is Lockport Dolomite at ~35-43 feet per ODNR desktop review; the applicant's borings hit bedrock at 31 feet in one location. The area is designated karst, but "The nearest documented karst feature is approximately 18 miles to the east. Given the thickness of glacially deposited overburden material, sinkhole formation is unlikely," and no documented geohazards exist in or adjacent to the project area. ODNR identified 20 oil and gas well records within one mile and none within a half mile; no mining within five miles. Field work: 20 borings of 20-49 feet, 37 feet of bedrock coring, cone penetration testing at 14 locations; groundwater in eight borings at 18-31 feet. (Staff Report pp. 7-8.)
hydric_soils_and_corrosion
- tag [verified]
- statement "The ODNR review indicated that 94% of the project area contains hydric soils which are frequently ponded from December to May." Both USDA data and the applicant's own resistivity testing confirm highly corrosive soils for buried steel and ferrous metals, and Condition 25 requires consultation with a soil corrosivity expert in final design. The 94%-hydric, ponded-half-the-year characterization is an independent corroboration of the Great Black Swamp lakebed-clay basis for this site's HSG D assignment in the BOSC profile.

noise

tag [verified]
baseline_daytime_leq_dba
- 53.2
- 60
baseline_nighttime_leq_dba
- 53.1
- 56
statement Baseline survey at three locations. "Operational noise level modeling showed anticipated operational nighttime noise levels are within 1 dBA of area ambient noise levels." Condition 11 binds the facility to the modeled operational impacts "plus 3 dBA, which is the modeling's described testing margin," and requires additional mitigation if exceeded. Condition 12 limits general construction to 07:00-19:00 and impact pile driving / hoe ram operations to 10:00-17:00 Monday through Friday. (Staff Report pp. 9-10.)

surface_water_and_species

tag [verified]
statement One intermittent stream, one pond and one stormwater basin were identified across the ~165.11-acre delineation study area. The project proposes 0.061 acres of permanent impact to the intermittent stream, requiring a Nationwide Permit 39 Preconstruction Notification to the USACE Buffalo District and an Ohio EPA §401 Water Quality Certification "if needed"; the existing pond becomes a stormwater basin. The project area is not in a FEMA 100-year floodplain. Construction stormwater runs under Ohio NPDES general permit OHC000006 with a SWPPP. (Staff Report pp. 12, 14-15.)
construction_stormwater_number_divergence
- tag [open]
- statement THREE DIFFERENT NUMBERS NAME THIS SITE'S CONSTRUCTION-STORMWATER AUTHORITY AND NONE OF THE SOURCES RECONCILES THEM. The Staff Report says twice that coverage would be obtained under Ohio NPDES construction general permit **OHC000006** (pp. 12, 14). The ECHO Wood County sweep in data/extracted/bowling-green/water-watch.yaml keys its coverages to master external permit **OHC000000**, under which APOLLO POWER GEN holds coverage **OHGC17963**. The final air permit (Responses 34 and 41) says Ohio EPA's Division of Surface Water "issued a Construction Stormwater Permit (**2GC08564\*AG**) to the Will-Power site on Jan. 4, 2026." The likely reading is that these are a general permit, its ICIS master-permit key, a site coverage under it, and an Ohio-format coverage number — i.e. different layers rather than competing claims — but NO captured source states that, and OHC000006 vs OHC000000 differ in a single digit in a way a transcription error would also produce. Cite whichever number the source you are quoting uses, and do not silently normalise one to another. Lead APOLLO-CGP-NUMBER-RECONCILIATION.
listed_species
- tag [verified]
- statement In range of Indiana bat, northern long-eared bat, tricolored bat and little brown bat — tree cutting of stems 3 inches DBH or greater restricted to October 1 through March 31, with a maximum of 1.24 acres of clearing (Condition 18). In range of the northern harrier — construction in preferred nesting habitat avoided April 15 through July 31 (Condition 19). Pondhorn mussel, western banded killifish, greater redhorse, Kirtland's snake and spotted turtle are in range but not likely impacted, as no in-water work in a perennial stream is proposed. (Staff Report pp. 15-16.)

gas_supply

tag [verified]
statement "Natural gas supply for the BTM facility would come from two 16-inch diameter gas pipelines. The Applicant intends to secure firm delivery of natural gas service from third parties to the power generation facility ... The two 16-inch diameter gas pipelines would be the subject of separate future filings with the Board." (Staff Report p. 3.) A gas yard within the footprint receives, processes and filters the gas to turbine specification.
adjacent_pipeline
- tag [verified]
- statement "The western perimeter of the project is adjacent to a TC Energy d/b/a Columbia Gas Transmission pipeline. The project's current design has an entrance from Mercer Road that crosses over the pipeline." (Staff Report p. 5.) Conditions 28 and 29 govern the crossing — encroachment agreement, 60-inch minimum HDD clearance, cathodic-protection non-interference, no blasting, construction fencing along the easement, and written confirmation from the pipeline owner.
supplier_is_open
- tag [open]
- statement ADJACENCY IS NOT SUPPLY. The Staff Report names TC Energy / Columbia Gas Transmission only as the owner of a pipeline the site's driveway crosses, and names no supplier for the two 16-inch laterals — it says only "third parties." Issue 1437 offers the NEXUS-owned Generation Pipeline / ANR / Panhandle web as the plausible tap and marks it unconfirmed; that remains the right posture, and the TC Energy mention must not be pressed into service as the answer. The laterals' own filings will name the source. Lead APOLLO-GAS-SUPPLIER.
lateral_filings
- tag [open]
- statement The two 16-inch laterals are separate future OPSB filings that had not been made as of the Staff Report. The Staff Report does not name them; the names "Apollo North" and "Apollo South" come from outside it — and "APOLLO NORTH PIPELINE" is independently corroborated as an Ohio construction-stormwater coverage (OHGC19094) in the ECHO sweep recorded at data/extracted/bowling-green/water-watch.yaml, which places a north lateral in construction even though no siting case for it has surfaced. Registered as a standing watch in data/extracted/bowling-green/power-watch.yaml.

laydown_yard

tag [verified]
statement "the Applicant would construct a temporary construction laydown yard for parts, material and equipment storage, construction trailers, and parking. The temporary construction laydown yard would be the subject of a future separate filing to the Board." (Staff Report p. 1.) A second unfiled sibling case at the report date; "APOLLO LAYDOWN" likewise appears as its own construction-stormwater coverage (OHGC18721) in the water-watch ECHO sweep.

transportation

tag [verified]
statement Access via Dixie Highway or I-75 to Middleton Pike to Mercer Road, with Dowling Road to Mercer Road as a feasible alternative. "the Applicant does anticipate approximately 100 'superloads'." A Road Use and Maintenance Agreement (RUMA) may be required by the Wood County Engineer, and a final Transportation Management Plan must be filed on the public docket before construction (Condition 20). (Staff Report pp. 5-6.)

aviation

tag [verified]
statement Wood County Airport is ~4.47 miles from the project area. Permanent structures (60-foot stacks, 79-foot gen-tie supports) are below the 200-foot FAA threshold and required no FAA filing. Temporary mobile cranes reach ~265 feet at the generation facility and ~120 feet along the gen-tie corridor, which DID require FAA notices at least 45 days before crane erection; the applicant filed them. ODOT Office of Aviation identified no adverse impact. (Staff Report pp. 13-14.)

solid_waste

tag [verified]
statement Up to approximately 250 cubic yards of waste annually while operational; hazardous waste is not anticipated. (Staff Report p. 13.)

conditions

tag [verified]
count 34
status These are Staff's recommended conditions as printed at Staff Report pp. 16-21. They became binding by operation of the automatic approval on 2026-02-03; the Board's own approval entry is a separate docket item that was not retrievable (see the capture manifest's retrieval warning), so this record cites the Staff Report's text and does not claim to quote an order.
the_ones_that_bite
- - id 2
  - subject three-year construction deadline (certificate invalid otherwise)
- - id 3
  - subject docket the construction-start, construction-complete and in-service dates
- - id 5
  - subject obtain and docket all federal/state permits BEFORE construction, and docket any permit violation within seven days of receipt
- - id 11
  - subject operational sound at nonparticipating receptors capped at modeled impacts + 3 dBA
- - id 13
  - subject quarterly complaint summary reports filed on the public docket during construction and through the first five years of operation
- - id 14
  - subject facility output shall not exceed 350 MW
- - id 15
  - subject no physical or electrical interconnection with the PJM Transmission System (OATT Part IV / Part VI)
- - id 16
  - subject exporting to the bulk power system requires a PJM new service request AND supplemental Board approval
- - id 23
  - subject minimum 50-foot setback from any active water well
- - id 26
  - subject notify Staff within 24 hours of notifying Ohio EPA of any permit violation
- - id 27
  - subject obtain and file on the case docket the Ohio EPA air permit-to-install-and-operate AND the Title V permit upon receipt
- - id 30
  - subject file the BESS fire-protection engineering review before placing the facility in service
- - id 31
  - subject BESS decommissioning — updated plan and cost estimate excluding salvage value at least 30 days before commissioning, secured by a performance bond with the OPSB as obligee, posted before the BESS goes into service, providing for removal within 12 months and recalculated every five years by an engineer
- - id 32
  - subject annual BESS firefighting training and equipment for local emergency responders, documented on the docket
- - id 34
  - subject annual operational compliance reports for at least three years after construction, including equipment failures, outages, warranty claims, and any use of the Mobile SMT 130 portable generator
condition_27_note
- tag [inference]
- statement Condition 27 is the join between this case and the air chain: it obliges the applicant to file the Ohio EPA PTI and the Title V permit on the OPSB docket when received. The PTI issued 2026-06-02 (data/extracted/oepa/bowling-green/P0139272.pti.yaml). Whether it was docketed as required cannot be checked, because the docket is access-blocked — so this is a compliance question the record cannot answer either way, not a compliance finding. Registered as a watch.

docket_access_gap

tag [verified]
statement THE OPSB DOCKET IS ACCESS-BLOCKED TO AUTOMATED RETRIEVAL, NOT EMPTY. The PUCO/OPSB Docketing Information System (dis.puc.state.oh.us) answers every programmatic request — plain, browser-headed, http and https alike — with either a 245-byte "Request Rejected" page or an F5/BIG-IP JavaScript bot-challenge (TSPD cookies and a /TSPD/ script) that cannot be satisfied without executing the challenge. This was confirmed against both the case-record URL and a specific document-image URL on 2026-08-01. No conclusion may be drawn from the absence of a document that could not be fetched. This is the same per-source negative recorded for Findlay's PUCO route in data/extracted/grid/findlay/megawatt-hub-interconnection.gap.yaml (issue 1464).
not_obtained
- the Letter of Notification application itself (filed 2025-11-05), including Figure 5 (water wells) and Table 4 (potential pre-construction permits)
- the ODNR review letter of 2025-11-03 (the "well study"), read here only as quoted and summarized by Staff
- the applicant's four sets of data-request responses, including Attachment B (the modeled noise impacts Condition 11 binds to)
- the public comments filed in the docket, and their count
- the Board's own approval entry of 2026-02-03
- the geotechnical data report (Application Appendix D), the Visual Resource Assessment, the Phase I cultural report, and the Preliminary Traffic Management Plan
what_would_resolve_it
- a browser-session capture of the DIS case record, or a records request to OPSB under R.C. 149.43
- the applicant's own project website, which posts some filings
- any later mirror by a news organization, as with the Staff Report itself

registrations_gap

tag [verified]
statement THE OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE BUSINESS SEARCH IS ALSO ACCESS-BLOCKED, so the registration records for Will-Power OH, LLC and Liames, LLC that issue 1437 asks for were not obtained. businesssearch.ohiosos.com no longer resolves; the current host businesssearch.ohiosos.gov and www.ohiosos.gov both return HTTP 403 with a ~1.3 MB challenge page to automated retrieval. Confirmed 2026-08-01. This repo's one existing SOS artifact (data/extracted/permits/sos-magenta-capital-llc-2025-10-17.sos.yaml) was captured from a filing PDF obtained by hand, and records no source URL — so there is no scripted route on file to reuse. Agents, formation dates, officers and statutory agents for both entities therefore remain [open]; nothing about either entity's corporate structure is asserted from inference. Lead APOLLO-SOS-REGISTRATIONS.
what_the_primary_record_does_establish
- Will-Power OH, LLC's business address and permit contact — 2000 Commerce Dr, Pittsburgh, PA 15275, Andy Woerner (Ohio EPA PTI and completeness letter, both captured)
- that the applicant's official project website sits on williams.com (OPSB Staff Report p. 9)
- that Liames, LLC is the customer of record and is building the adjacent campus (OPSB Staff Report p. 1; OPSB news release 2026-02-03)

Where it connects

recordsUtility siting

grid/bowling-green/apollo-power-generation-facility.yaml · — · grid

✎ Suggest a correction