Independent public-records research · Evidence and updates
Site Layer 4 Project RecordIndependent public-records researchPart ofState 44

Take action

Meet the developer and have your say

Ask questions at the developer’s open house, or submit comments through the county and federal processes. Each opportunity has a different purpose.

Examples are proposed requests; check official notices before attending or filing.

Developer-hostedCommunity open house

Meet the developer. Bring your questions.

5:30–7 p.m. · Wheatland local time

Wheatland Agriplex Building
59 Antelope Road, Wheatland, Wyoming

Site Layer 4, LLC has announced an informal introductory session about its proposed co-located energy and digital infrastructure project. Residents are invited to meet the developer, ask questions and share comments.

This is a developer-hosted meeting. It is separate from the county hearing and federal filing deadline below. Sharing comments here does not replace submitting comments through those official processes.

Read the announcement shared by The Platte County Record-Times (opens in a new tab)

Announcement checked September 24, 2026. Times are shown as local to the Wheatland venue; the announcement does not specify a timezone. Check the source for updates before attending.

CountyPublic hearing

Date needs confirmation

County hearing date needs confirmation. The notice has displayed both October 7 and October 20 at 1 p.m. MDT. Confirm with the Planning Office before attending. Official notice (opens in a new tab).

Countywide land-use rules

County commissioners will hear comments on proposed land-use rules, including changes concerning data centers.

This is not a Site Layer 4 permit hearing.

  • Attend: Commissioner Room, County Courthouse, 800 9th Street, Wheatland.
  • Write: Email planner@plattecountywyoming.com or deliver comments to the courthouse Planning Office.
  • Timing: Send written comments early if possible.
Official hearing notice (opens in a new tab) Proposed rule changes (PDF) (opens in a new tab) September 16 recommendation and unresolved questions → Speaking, remote options and email guidance →
Federal / FERCFiling deadline

3 p.m. MDT / 5 p.m. EDT

Register now if you need an account. Full registration requires email validation. Don’t count on instant activation—start before filing day.

Register your FERC account (opens in a new tab)

Tri-State’s agreement-filing changes

What FERC is deciding
Whether Tri-State’s revised tariff satisfies an order to file certain large-load agreements for federal review.
Why residents may care
The stakes are who pays if a large customer’s project falls through. Requiring agreements with different Basin Electric terms to be filed lets FERC review the financial backing meant to protect other cooperative members from those costs.
Who may want to follow
Cooperative members and residents following large-load costs and agreement terms.
What it does not decide
Site Layer 4 permits, local operating rules or county funding. This is not a new vote on the whole tariff; the project’s actual utility agreements remain unverified.
Technical scope and source records

The September 9 compliance filing concerns revised §§3.6 and 5.3.1: filing non-conforming agreements when Basin Electric imposes different terms. Relevant comments address whether those revisions satisfy paragraphs 80–82 of FERC’s August 14 order. September 30 is a filing deadline, not a promised decision date.

August 14 order (opens in a new tab)
September 9 compliance package (opens in a new tab)
Tariff background and evidence limits →

  • Docket: ER26-1929-002.
  • File: Use FERC’s eFiling system. Don’t use FERC’s Quick Comment (eComment) form; it does not accept this ER docket.
Official eFiling instructions (opens in a new tab) Published federal deadline (opens in a new tab) Federal filing walkthrough and alternatives →

What to actually say

For county-rule comments, copy one or two sentences below and adapt them to your own concern. Add a relevant rule, record or personal experience if helpful. Federal comments should address the narrower filing question above.

  • Water

    I ask that the county’s data-center rules require a defined water budget and developer-funded independent baseline testing of nearby wells before pumping begins.

    Related requests: ongoing well monitoring and lawful, funded mitigation. The applicant’s differing water estimates remain unreconciled.

  • Enforcement

    I ask that the county’s data-center rules identify who will inspect projects, how often inspections will occur, what results will be public, and what lawful remedies apply when rules are broken.

  • Decommissioning

    I ask that the county’s data-center rules require financial security that can be used to pay for removal and site restoration if a project closes or is abandoned.

    Zoning reversion is not a cleanup fund.

  • Who pays / public costs

    I ask that the county’s data-center rules require lawful, binding agreements identifying the developer’s share of added road, emergency service and independent review costs.

    Independent-review escrow authority remains unverified.

  • Operating standards

    I ask that the county’s data-center rules set measurable noise and lighting limits, appropriate distances from neighboring properties, and a clear process for checking compliance.

  • State oversight

    I ask the county to explain which state reviews apply to a data-center project, what protections those reviews provide, and how the county can lawfully address any gaps.

County timing. No separate written-comment cutoff is stated. Sending comments early is practical advice, not an official deadline. The hearing notice does not guarantee a vote that day.

Proposed requests. The examples are not adopted requirements; some build on existing rules or meeting discussion, and others are new requests. County authority must be established for each proposed condition.

Keep a copy. Retain written comments and seek receipt confirmation if needed; acknowledgment or permanent retention is not promised here.

Asking for safeguards and answers does not require a position on whether the project should proceed. Sources and verification history →

01 · County

County land-use rules

Comment on proposed countywide land-use standards.

Public hearingDate needs confirmationNotice has displayed October 7 and October 20, both at 1 p.m. MDT
Where to goCommissioner RoomCounty Courthouse
800 9th Street, Wheatland

The Board of County Commissioners will hear comments on proposed county land-use rule changes. This is not an advertised Site Layer 4 SUP hearing.

Attend the hearing

Confirm the hearing date with the Planning Office before attending. The notice lists the Commissioner Room at the County Courthouse, 800 9th Street, Wheatland, and 1 p.m. local time (MDT). No confirmed resolution of the October 7 / October 20 conflict was found.

The county gives the local time; MDT identifies the applicable local timezone. Recheck the official notice before attending.

Read the official hearing notice (opens in a new tab)

Do I need to sign up, and is there a time limit?

The notice does not specify a speaker sign-up process or speaking time limit. The county’s general meeting guidance (opens in a new tab) asks prospective speakers to contact the County Clerk at (307) 322-2315. Call ahead to ask how this hearing will handle public comments, and arrive a few minutes early.

Can I attend or comment remotely?

The county says most commissioner meetings are streamed on its YouTube channel (opens in a new tab). The hearing notice does not confirm a stream or give instructions for speaking remotely. You can comment without attending by emailing the Planning Office; ask the Clerk about live viewing or remote speaking.

Speaking and viewing guidance checked September 23, 2026 against the notice, commissioners’ page and county’s Watch Meetings Online listing (opens in a new tab).

Send written comments

Email the Planning Office, or deliver comments to the Planning Office in the courthouse.

planner@plattecountywyoming.com

Email the Planning Office

What should I put in the subject line?

Use a clear subject naming the proposed rules. The email link above fills in this suggested wording; the notice does not require a particular subject.

Public comment: proposed data-center land-use rule amendments

Timing and recordkeeping notes

Keep a copy and seek receipt confirmation if needed. County notice (C6) (opens in a new tab)

What should I write?

Start with a copyable sentence for the issue you care about, then add your own concern or experience.

Read the proposed amendments (opens in a new tab). Identify the chapter or section and distinguish a requested countywide standard from a future project-specific condition.

  1. Identify the rule or issue. Name the proposal, chapter or section you are commenting on.
  2. Explain your concern. Say what concerns you and why.
  3. State the change you want. Make the requested change clear.
Longer example: expansion and enforcement

Example wording to adapt.

I ask the county to retain proposed rules requiring a new review before a data-center project expands beyond the server capacity, electricity demand or cooling facilities approved in its permit.

I also ask for separate review of related power generation and storage.

I ask for lawful, binding project requirements that set operating limits, fund public services, and make inspection and public reporting duties clear.

Suggested safeguards to mention

Use the six copyable comments under What to actually say, then follow P1–P8 for specific proposed safeguards. (C4 (opens in a new tab); COUNTY-008–009,021,023,033; WATER-001–015)

Earlier comment periods

Earlier county windows: The August rezoning and September 16 P&Z comment windows are historical. The September 16 outcome is a recommendation advancing to commissioners. Use the current commissioner notice; do not reuse the earlier September 10 written-comment cutoff. No later Site Layer 4 SUP hearing date is established in the reviewed records. [COUNTY-013–015; county participation-source limits]

Back to county / federal choices

02 · Federal

Federal utility filing

Comment on Tri-State’s September compliance filing.

Filing deadline3 p.m. MDT / 5 p.m. EDT
Docket numberER26-1929-002

This is a filing deadline, not a promised FERC decision date. The September 21 bounded docket search found no changed Tri-State deadline; check for subsequent entries before filing. Published deadline (opens in a new tab)

What does this proceeding cover?

FERC is reviewing whether Tri-State’s revised tariff satisfies its agreement-filing order. This concerns review of differing utility terms, not a Site Layer 4 permit or a new vote on the whole tariff. Read the plain-English explanation and technical scope above, then use the steps below to file. (E1 (opens in a new tab), E2 (opens in a new tab), E3 (opens in a new tab), E4 (opens in a new tab); ENERGY-003,007)

How do I participate?

Use FERC’s eFiling system. Don’t use FERC’s Quick Comment (eComment) form; it does not accept this ER docket.

Open FERC Online — eFiling (opens in a new tab)

Read FERC’s official eFiling instructions (opens in a new tab). A comment or protest does not make you a party; intervention is a separate filing.

  1. Register now and validate your account

    Complete full registration at FERC Online (opens in a new tab), then use the confirmation email to validate your account. Register now; don’t count on instant activation. If you already have an account, check that you can sign in now. Once signed in, select eFiling.

  2. Prepare your comment

    Prepare a signed comment identifying ER26-1929-002 and the September 9 compliance filing (accession 20260909-5123).

  3. Choose the filing type and docket

    Select General → Comment (on Filing, Environ. Report, or Tech Conf) and choose the exact subdocket: ER26-1929-002.

  4. Upload, review and submit

    Upload the public document, identify the filing party and signer/contact, review the summary, and submit.

  5. Keep your confirmation

    Retain confirmation and check the acceptance/rejection notice and docket entry. A saved draft is not a completed filing.

What could I say?

Keep the comment focused on this compliance filing and the change you are requesting—not a new vote on the whole tariff or county land-use approval.

Plain-language example

For an electronic filing, your typed name can serve as your signature. FERC Rule 2005(c) (opens in a new tab).

Adapt this wording and replace the bracketed details before filing. Type /s/ followed by your name; that’s your electronic signature. Add your town and cooperative membership if applicable, or remove those optional details.

Re: Tri-State’s September 9, 2026 compliance filing
Docket: ER26-1929-002
Accession: 20260909-5123

I am concerned about other electric cooperative members being left with costs if a large customer’s project falls through. In ER26-1929-002, I ask FERC to make sure the large-customer agreements covered by this filing must be submitted for federal review when they contain special terms, including different financial guarantees.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ [Your full name]
[Town], Wyoming · [Cooperative member, if applicable]
Date: [Month day, year]

Precise version — tariff references

This filing concerns agreements with terms required by Basin Electric that differ from Tri-State’s standard terms. The version below identifies the tariff sections and asks when the filing duty applies.

Adapt this wording and replace the bracketed details before filing. Type /s/ followed by your name; that’s your electronic signature. Add your town and cooperative membership if applicable, or remove those optional details.

Re: Tri-State’s September 9, 2026 compliance filing
Docket: ER26-1929-002
Accession: 20260909-5123

Please determine whether revised §§3.6 and 5.3.1 fully implement the August order’s requirement to file non-conforming agreements containing differing Basin terms. Please identify how the filing commitment and its evaluation-based timing apply to those agreements.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ [Your full name]
[Town], Wyoming · [Cooperative member, if applicable]
Date: [Month day, year]

Paper filing instructions

Paper alternative: Address filings to the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. USPS mail goes to 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivery and other carriers go to 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852. Allow for receipt and processing; do not rely on the postmark. Consult current copy and service requirements for the document being filed. FERC delivery guidance (opens in a new tab); Rule 2001 (opens in a new tab)

Party status and intervention

A comment or protest does not make you a party. Intervention is a separate filing with interest, timing, and service requirements; late intervention is not assured. A protest must be served on the person against whom it is directed. Intervenors also have service obligations. Follow the intervention guidance (opens in a new tab) and applicable Rules 211, 214 and 2010 (opens in a new tab). Do not assume this compliance notice reopens every issue decided in August.

Back to county / federal choices

State and future project proceedings

No Site Layer 4 state hearing/comment deadline or future SUP hearing date is established in this review. Follow actual notices once a proceeding is identified. See State oversight for the unresolved route and Project notes for the records needed. Do not treat a records-request follow-up date as a public-comment deadline.

Back to county / federal choices

Sources and verification history

September 28, 2026 — county hearing date unresolved

County hearing date needs confirmation. The notice has displayed both October 7 and October 20 at 1 p.m. MDT. Confirm with the Planning Office before attending.

The county notice retrieved September 28 displays October 7. The September 23 check below recorded October 20, and the September 24 monitoring record reported conflicting renditions. No confirmed resolution was found. This check does not establish either date as confirmed, and no Planning Office confirmation has been obtained.

The notice concerns proposed countywide land-use rules, not a Site Layer 4 permit hearing or a promised vote. It lists 1 p.m. local time; MDT is the local-time interpretation. Email and Planning Office delivery remain the listed written-comment routes, with no separate cutoff stated. This date review did not recheck the federal docket. Earlier county entries below are historical observations, not current scheduling confirmation.

September 24, 2026 — developer open-house announcement

The Platte County Record-Times reproduced an announcement signed Site Layer 4, LLC for an informal community open house on October 5, 2026, 5:30–7 p.m., at the Wheatland Agriplex Building, 59 Antelope Road. The public Facebook post was read directly. This establishes an announced developer session, not a county permit hearing, official comment deadline or project approval. This check did not reverify the county hearing date or federal docket. Event details and source ↑

September 23, 2026 — historical date-change observation

The updated county notice was recorded on September 23 as explicitly marking the date changed and listing October 20, 2026, at 1 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time, replacing October 7. The location remains the Commissioner Room, County Courthouse, 800 9th Street, Wheatland. Written comments may still be emailed to planner@plattecountywyoming.com or delivered to the courthouse Planning Office; no separate written-comment cutoff is stated.

This remains a hearing on proposed countywide land-use rules, not a Site Layer 4 permit hearing or a promised vote. The notice states 1 p.m. local time; MDT identifies the applicable timezone. This check covered the county notice and written-comment routes; it did not repeat the federal docket search. The September 21 and earlier entries below preserve what was verified at those times; neither historical date resolves the later conflict. See the September 28 update above before making attendance plans.

September 21, 2026 — participation and status check

The county notice (opens in a new tab) still lists October 7, 2026, at 1 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time for a hearing on proposed county land-use rules at the courthouse. It permits written comments to the Planning Office or its listed email address and gives no separate written-comment cutoff. This is not a newly established project-specific permit hearing or a promised vote.

The federal notice (opens in a new tab) still lists September 30, 2026, at 5 p.m. Eastern / 3 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time for ER26-1929-002. Use FERC eFiling (opens in a new tab), not eComment, for this electric-rate docket.

A September 21 FERC eLibrary (opens in a new tab) search of ER26-1929, all subdockets, filed September 9–21 inclusive, returned only compliance filing 20260909-5123 and notice 20260909-3058. Issuance and submittal records were included, with no keyword, document-class, industry, security or party restriction. No later acceptance order or changed deadline appeared within that result. This is a bounded search, not proof that no later record exists elsewhere or will be filed afterward.

The current search inspected result metadata. The two erratum bodies were read on September 20, not reread on September 21; they concern other proceedings. Other detailed evidence retains its own review dates. Check the official notices and docket again before attending or filing.

County notice and September 20 check

Public hearing: October 7, 2026, at 1 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time, in the Commissioner Room, County Courthouse, 800 9th Street, Wheatland. The Board of County Commissioners will hear comments on proposed county land-use rule changes. This is not an advertised Site Layer 4 SUP hearing, and the notice does not guarantee a vote that day. The county gives the local time; MDT identifies the applicable local timezone. Official notice (opens in a new tab)

Notice and written routes checked September 20, 2026. Recheck the official notice before attending or submitting.

Federal notice, errata and September 20 check

Docket ER26-1929-002 • filing accession 20260909-5123. The published notice gives September 30, 2026, at 5 p.m. EDT / 3 p.m. MDT as the comment deadline. The September 21 bounded docket search found no changed Tri-State deadline; check for subsequent entries before filing. Both identified erratum bodies were read: they extend deadlines in EL26-105-000 (Agilitas) and EL26-106-000 (RWE), not this Tri-State proceeding. September 30 is a filing deadline, not a promised FERC decision date. Federal notice, printed p. 58110 (opens in a new tab); Agilitas erratum (opens in a new tab); RWE erratum (opens in a new tab)

September 20 verification: the notice was reread and both erratum bodies inspected, not only metadata. The ER26-1929 search covered all subdockets, filed September 9–20, issuance and submittal, with no keyword, class, industry, security or party restriction; it returned only filing 20260909-5123 and notice 20260909-3058. No later acceptance order appeared; acceptance remains unverified. The eFiling route was checked September 20. FERC eLibrary (opens in a new tab) is for finding records, not submitting comments.