Williams County approves appeal for CCMF facility after applicant outlines site, noise controls

The Williams County Board of County Commissioners voted 4-0 to approve an appeal that allows an applicant to move forward with permitting for a proposed CCMF facility near Drive Fork Township, the board recorded.

The approval lets the applicant advance to the county’s conditional‑use‑permit (CUP) process; commissioners said specific design, noise mitigation and reclamation requirements will be addressed in that subsequent review.

Applicant representative Scott told commissioners the project would sit on an existing 80‑acre parcel south of MWEC substations and that the company plans to subdivide a 25‑acre parcel for phase 1. He said proximity to existing transmission and cooperation with MWEC were key reasons for choosing the site and that the company expects to build an on‑site substation as it expands.

Scott described the facility’s operations as a highly flexible electrical load that can provide demand‑response services for the grid. “We can turn our load off within seconds, under 10 seconds,” Scott said, describing the operation’s ability to reduce draw during grid events. He also discussed equipment choices aimed at lowering community noise: the company plans to use liquid‑cooled servers paired with industrial dry (adiabatic) coolers, which the applicant said generate a lower pitch and roughly “25, 30 percent lower decibels” than older, air‑cooled facilities. Scott said the project’s peak noise at the equipment source would be about 70 decibels and that measurements at roughly 1,000 feet were “close to about 40, 45” decibels.

On site scale, Scott said the initial phase would include about a dozen large cooling units at roughly 2.5 megawatts each (about 30 megawatts total). He said a full build‑out to about 100 megawatts would depend on a power study with MWEC and could require roughly 50 similar coolers. For jobs, Scott cited an industry rule of thumb of roughly two employees per megawatt, estimating about 15 permanent jobs at 30 megawatts and about 50 at 100 megawatts, while noting those figures were approximate.

Residents and neighbors spoke at the hearing. Darryl Verchstrom, who identified himself as living within a mile of the proposed facility, asked the county to require a land survey because he said the applicant’s distance measurements used roadway mileage rather than straight‑line distance: “I live more than a mile away,” he said and asked for the survey to be completed in writing before any final votes. John Wipasnick asked about fire mitigation and liability insurance. Kathy Walton played a 30‑second audio clip and said the proposal “didn’t sound like there were any downsides” in the presentation and cautioned commissioners that residents’ real experience could differ.

Other commenters urged that new facilities be sited in consolidated industrial areas rather than scattered across farmland. Several commissioners echoed that neighborhood outreach, township meetings and conditions in the CUP process would be the appropriate place to nail down mitigation, reclamation and community protections. One commissioner said township meetings with neighbors should be the next step before detailed approvals.

On the motion to approve the appeal for the CCMF facility (the motion referenced battery storage in the motion language), the board recorded the roll call: Bo — Yes; Chris — Yes; Barry — Yes; Corey — Yes. The chair announced the motion carried.

Next steps are for the applicant to proceed through the county’s CUP process, complete required studies and meet with the township and neighbors as part of the permitting review.