On Sept. 14, 2026, Meta said its Eagle Mountain data center "is matched with 100% clean and renewable energy." Public filings with the city, the state Division of Air Quality and the Public Service Commission show something the announcement doesn't mention: a Williams natural gas power plant planned on Meta's campus to serve Meta's expansion, set up to run separate from Rocky Mountain Power, with Meta Platforms, Inc. guaranteeing the power contract.
Meta runs a large data center in Eagle Mountain, in Utah County. To power its expansion, a natural gas power plant is planned on Meta's land. Williams will own it, and Meta Platforms, Inc. guarantees the contract. Meta's Sept. 14, 2026 announcement did not mention the plant.
This is Part 2. It lays out what public filings show about the plant, its contracts, its air permit, how it may be taxed and who decides what happens next. Part 1 covers the campus itself: the 2018 deal, the tax breaks, jobs, water and 2024 energy use.
Why it matters outside Eagle Mountain: the state law this plant is filed under (S.B. 132) applies everywhere in Utah. The tax, air and water decisions made here will set the pattern for the next data center, including the ones proposed in northern Utah, like Stratos in Box Elder County.
How it was made: everything comes from public records: city, state and utility filings, campaign finance reports and published news. No one was asked for comment. Anything not yet decided is marked that way.
IN PLAIN WORDSTap any card to see what the word means. Every term used below is here.
IN PLAIN WORDSMeta is getting a private gas power plant built next to its data center. Most of the public story is about Meta's clean energy, but city and state paperwork show the gas plant too.
IN PLAIN WORDSHere is what the documents show Meta doing, and what they show it not doing or not saying.
Each item is from a public document linked in Sources. Meta is not the applicant in the state case; the power contract runs through Williams entities, with Meta as guarantor.
"Matched with 100% clean and renewable energy" describes an accounting match: Meta buys as much renewable power over a year as the campus uses. It does not mean every hour of power it uses is clean. It can be true at the same time a gas plant serves part of the campus. The records don't show how much of the expansion's power will come from gas versus the grid, and Meta's announcement doesn't say.
Both statements can be accurate The gas plant is missing from the public announcementIN PLAIN WORDSA gas company, Williams, is building a power plant on Meta's land. It burns natural gas to make electricity and sends all of it to Meta.
Owned and operated by Williams companies. Supplied by an 18.9-mile, 20-inch gas pipeline from the MountainWest Pipeline Goshen interconnect.
Solid arrows: gas or power flows described in the filings. Dotted arrow: money and ownership. The grid and the gas plant are not connected. How much of the campus each power source serves is not in the public record.
The codes (UTRC, SWPP, EP, DC, PLGA) are the city's and state's permit numbers for dirt work, stormwater runoff, foundations, buildings and site plans. "Active" means issued; "Pending" means still waiting.
| Permit | Number | Agency | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Gen Air Permit (Site ID 16322) | — | Utah DEQ | Pending | — |
| Stormwater General Permit | UTRC11991 | Utah DEQ | Active | 12/2/2025 |
| MS4 SWPPP approval | SWPP-25-31 | Eagle Mountain | Active | 12/9/2025 |
| Rough grading | EP-25-112 | Eagle Mountain Planning | Active | 11/25/2025 |
| Foundation work | EP-26-17 | Eagle Mountain Planning | Active | 2/20/2026 |
| Construction trailers | TRLR-26-1, TRLR-26-2 | Eagle Mountain Planning | Active | 3/23/2026 |
| Water agreement | — | Eagle Mountain | Active | 3/26/2026 |
| Power Gen building permit (15 kV) | DC-26-10 | Eagle Mountain Building | Active | 4/10/2026 |
| Master development agreement | — | Eagle Mountain | Active | 4/17/2026 |
| Site plan approval | PLGA-26-15 | Eagle Mountain Planning | Pending | — |
| Powerline | TBD | Eagle Mountain Building | Pending | — |
| Phased building permits: turbines (GE Vernova 1–11, C250 1–6), SCR stack, ammonia area, fuel gas yard, battery (BESS), operations building, warehouse | DC-26-15 and others | Eagle Mountain Building | Pending | — |
| Section | What the draft says |
|---|---|
| Parties | Eagle Mountain City and "[Will-Power UT, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company]." A drafting note says: "Confirm Will-Power UT, LLC is the correct entity." |
| Recital B | The plant site is part of the property under a Development Agreement "dated October 21, 2025, by and between the City and Stadion, LLC." |
| Art. III, payment | "$______" (blank), "non-refundable." The city "understands that the Company would not develop the Generation Project in the City without such benefits and assurances." |
| 4.1 Taxes | The company may "protest, oppose and vote against any and all Taxes." |
| 4.2 New taxes | The city "shall not during the Term recommend or support any new Taxes that are applicable solely and exclusively to the Generation Project, the Generation Property or the data center industry." "Taxes" includes public infrastructure districts and other special districts. |
| 5.1 Vested right (locked-in promise) | The company may "maintain, remodel, renovate, rehabilitate, rebuild, replenish or replace" the plant "throughout the Term for any reason." |
| 5.2(b) Noise | Up to 75 dBA at the property line. The city "may not revoke this approval based on any future approved uses adjacent or near." |
| 5.2(d) Power lines | No duty to bury lines to Meta's property, except at street crossings. |
| 5.3 Rule freeze | Later changes to city rules don't apply to the plant, except building and safety codes. The city will not change rules "in a manner that adversely affects… the data center industry." Staff won't support rezoning neighboring land to residential unless the rezone protects the plant's "noise, light, traffic or other activity." |
| 5.4 Moratoria (temporary pauses) | A future moratorium applies only if it is needed for public health and safety and applies city-wide. |
| 5.5–5.6 Speed | Target of 10 days per approval; a dedicated building inspector; the city acts within 10 business days and helps get other agencies' permits. |
| 5.8 Added land | Any adjacent land the company later buys is automatically covered. |
| 6.2 Water | The company buys its own water; effluent to the city capped at 800 mg/L dissolved solids. |
| Art. VIII Term | 40 years. "The Company may at any time and for any reason terminate." The city can end it only after an uncured default (10.1). No renewal clause. |
| 11.4–11.5 Transfers | Can be handed to affiliates or buyers; "shall run with the Generation Property" (stays attached to the land if sold). |
| 11.13 Records | "All building plans shall be deemed Confidential Business Information." The city must send the company any public-records request within 2 business days and wait at least 10 business days so the company can contest release. |
| Not in the draft | Plant size; decommissioning or cleanup; the payment amount; acreage and parcel numbers. |
This is the draft attached to the Feb. 24 Planning Commission packet. Williams' own permit list shows a master development agreement "Active" April 17, 2026; the signed version may differ.
IN PLAIN WORDSMost of the contract is blacked out. These are the parts that aren't, and they show the deal is written as Meta making its own power.
From the redacted Amended and Restated Power Purchase Agreement (Eagle Mountain, Utah) filed with the Public Service Commission. Prices, sizes and terms are blacked out; these passages are not.
| Topic | The contract's words | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Whose power it is | "Buyer desires to self-generate Energy in quantities sufficient to power the Data Center Facilities." | The deal is written as the buyer's own generation, with Williams building and running it. |
| The turbines | "GE Equipment" is equipment transferred "from Buyer to Seller to be installed at the Generation Facility Site." | The buyer supplies the GE turbines. |
| Buying the plant | "Buyout Price" means the price "payable by Buyer to Seller for a Buyout." | The buyer can purchase the plant. The price formula (Exhibit I) is redacted. |
| Batteries | A battery system "anticipated to include [Tesla] battery megapacks," added through a design change. | Batteries were added when the contract was rewritten Feb. 6, 2026. (The filing spells it "Testa.") |
| The land | The plant site is "owned or to be owned by Seller" (Williams); the data center site is "owned by Buyer" (Meta's company). | The plant's land is transferred to Williams. |
| Extensions | The buyer may extend the term; gas prices then reset to "arm's-length market pricing" (regular market prices). | The deal can run longer than its initial term (length redacted). |
| Taxes | Seller pays "all Taxes… with respect to the Generation Facility"; the parties "shall reasonably cooperate to minimize each Party's Taxes." | Williams is responsible for the plant's taxes. |
IN PLAIN WORDSThe city, the state air office and the state utility board each have a say. Here's the order things happened.
Utah certificate of existence, entity no. 14601038-0161.
The contract's own recitals: "Power Purchase Agreement dated as of September 30, 2025." This is before any public city agenda item on the plant.
Meta Platforms, Inc. (Oct. 8) and The Williams Companies, Inc. (Oct. 9), per the contract's definitions.
Named in the Williams draft as the "Stadion Development Agreement" that makes gas power a permitted use. Its text has not been found.
Per the contract's recitals.
The state's label for a company allowed to sell power privately to a big customer. Under S.B. 132 (2025), Utah Code 54-26. "Up to 286 megawatts." Grading permit issued Nov. 25.
Agenda: "Energy Project for Meta in Coordination with Williams."
Rewritten from scratch with changes. Effective as of Sept. 30, 2025. Seller: Williams Field Services Group, LLC. Buyer's name redacted.
Allen, Hess, DeCoursey yes; Lane no. Four residents spoke; the minutes don't record what they said. The March 3 City Council vote has not been located.
Applicant asks to keep "the name of the customer" confidential.
The state sent it back as incomplete. The 60-day deadline for a decision does not start.
Power-generation building permit issued April 10.
Memo DAQE-MN163220001A-26 reviews the air impact analysis for Will-Power's Notice of Intent.
Missing the declaration (a signed statement) from Rocky Mountain Power confirming the plant is not connected to its lines. July 8: "no further action… until a party requests it."
$5.34 billion joint venture covering Aquila and four other Williams projects.
In the rulemaking case, Will-Power "supports the deletion of the Declaration requirement," citing its "experience in working to obtain the Declaration."
"The electricity use is matched with 100% clean and renewable energy." No mention of the gas plant.
IN PLAIN WORDSAnything that pollutes the air needs a state permit. Williams has applied. The public gets 30 days to comment once the state posts a draft.
Williams' filing says Will-Power "has applied for the requisite Power Gen Air Permit." A Division of Air Quality modeling memo dated April 23, 2026 (DAQE-MN163220001A-26) reviews the application and places the site in "a marginal nonattainment area" for ozone (the area already has too much smog, in the least-severe category) and a maintenance area for PM10 (it used to have too much dust and is being watched). It states: "This is not a Major Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Source," meaning it is below the size that triggers the strictest federal permit.
Williams' own summary says the plant "will not cause or contribute to any new air quality violations." The emissions figures in that exhibit are redacted.
When DAQ publishes its intent to approve, a 30-day public comment period opens. At two other Utah data center gas plants, Novva and Joule, DAQ recorded "No public comments" on the final permits.
Process followed: notice of intent and state modeling review Emission numbers redacted in the PSC copyIN PLAIN WORDSA 2025 law lets big users buy power from their own private plant. The state must approve each deal. This one is stuck because a required form is missing.
S.B. 132 (2025) lets customers of 100 megawatts or more buy power from a private generator that is completely separate from the utility. The PSC must approve the contract and confirm ratepayers bear none of the cost.
IN PLAIN WORDSNormal power plants are taxed by the state. A plant serving only one company might be taxed by the county instead. Nobody has decided which applies here.
Utah's Tax Commission centrally assesses (the state sets the value of) "all property of public utilities." A utility, by law, serves "the public generally," and a plant generating "solely for the producer's own use" is not an electrical corporation. S.B. 132 exempts closed private systems from regulation "as a public utility." Read together, a plant like Aquila may fall to the Utah County assessor instead of the Tax Commission. No ruling or Tax Commission guidance found says either way; the Gardner Institute's August 2026 brief says power plants "may be centrally assessed."
The contract makes Williams responsible for the plant's taxes and says both sides "shall reasonably cooperate to minimize each Party's Taxes." The city's draft agreement bars it from supporting any new tax aimed solely at the plant "or the data center industry," and lets the company "protest, oppose and vote against any and all Taxes."
An AI-generated summary of a Nov. 26, 2025 Utah County Commission meeting quotes staff saying the power facility adds about $350 million in value and sits outside the CRA boundary. That has not been checked against the official minutes and is not used here as fact.
Open: state or county assessment Earliest tax roll likely Jan. 1, 2027IN PLAIN WORDSThis page is about the gas plant. The data center it will serve has its own story: how the 2018 deal was made, the tax breaks, the jobs, and how much power and water it uses. That is all in Part 1.
IN PLAIN WORDSMeta isn't the only one. Other Utah data centers have state permits for their own gas power.
Aquila: registration filing. Novva and Joule: engine counts times unit ratings in their DAQ approval orders.
At the Feb. 10, 2026 Planning Commission meeting, the city's Director of Legislative and Strategic Services said QTS's development agreement includes energy production but not nuclear, and that "QTS prefers to get power from the grid and uses on-site generation as a last resort." Grist reported QTS had received a 200 MW gas air permit and then secured Rocky Mountain Power service instead.
| Project | Where | Air permit | Equipment | Public comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project Aquila (Williams, for Meta) | Eagle Mountain, ozone nonattainment | Notice of intent under review (Site 16322) | 286 MW filed; turbines and battery | Not yet noticed |
| Novva | West Jordan, ozone / PM2.5 / SO2 nonattainment (already too polluted) | DAQE-AN160660003-24, 12/19/2024 | 72 gas engines; had to pay for 47 tons a year of smog-gas cuts elsewhere (offsets) | "No public comments were received" |
| Joule Capital Partners | Millard County, attainment | DAQE-AN162810001-26, 1/22/2026 | 69 gas engines + 69 diesel; 230 tons a year of NOx (smog-causing gas) | "No public comments were received" |
| Aligned | West Jordan | DAQE-NN162210002-25 notice, 11/16/2025 | 12 simple-cycle turbines | Comment period closed 12/16/2025 |
IN PLAIN WORDSSome of the same people and groups show up in other stories on this site. A shared name is a link to follow, not proof of wrongdoing.
Each link below comes from this site's earlier research. A shared name is a connection, not an accusation.
Sen. Scott Sandall sponsored S.B. 132, the law Project Aquila is filed under. Sandall gave Tami Tran's Senate campaign $1,000 on July 28, 2026 (Case 21).
Faraday Solar in Eagle Mountain, 685.3 MW, reached operation Sept. 30, 2025, and serves Meta under a 20-year contract through Rocky Mountain Power (Excelsior Energy Capital). Meta's renewable claims rest on projects like this one.
Earlier coverage, including a real estate blog and the first version of this site's Part 1, described Aquila as two 200 MW sites totaling 520 MW. Part 1 has been corrected. The PSC registration and the city minutes both say 286 MW. The 520 MW figure appears only in trade press and is not used here as fact.
| Case file | What it adds |
|---|---|
| Candidates 2026, Case 21: Tran vs. Neal (SD-6) | Meta's PAC spending for Tran, All In For Utah's in-kind ads, Sen. Sandall's $1,000 |
| Case 22: Bitner vs. Last (HD-17) | All In For Utah PAC's $319.13 to Bitner |
| Case 11: Searle (HD-59) | Who runs All In For Utah PAC |
| Case 16: Koford vs. Hernandez (SD-5) | H.B. 76's primary sponsor, and the pushback she described |
| Part 1: The Deal That Started Under Another Name | The 2018 Stadion negotiations and the water confidentiality agreement |
| Data Centers & S.B. 132 | The law Project Aquila is filed under |
| S.B. 114 (2020) | The data center sales tax exemption |
| "Do You Have The Land?" Stratos | The other large S.B. 132 project, in Box Elder County |
| H.B. 507 (2026), Bill Tracker | The new incentive rules and the Increment Authorization Committee |
IN PLAIN WORDSThe Legislature has set up several new groups that will shape how data centers and power plants get approved, taxed and powered. Most of their members are picked by legislative leaders or the governor, not elected to those seats. Whoever sits in the Legislature helps decide who serves on them and what rules come out of them.
Each group below was created or asked for in public legislative records. None of them has decided anything about Project Aquila. They matter because they will write or apply the rules for the next project like it.
| Group | What it does | Who picks the members | Why it matters here |
|---|---|---|---|
| Increment Authorization Committee (H.B. 507, 2026) | Approves Regionally Significant Development Zones, which let new property tax growth be kept for a project instead of going to the usual taxing bodies | Two members picked by the Senate President, two by the House Speaker; for energy zones, the Office of Economic Development director and a governor's appointee | Large data centers and their power plants are the kind of project these zones can cover. Legislative leaders choose the lawmakers who vote. |
| "Large Data Center Amendments" (2027 bill request) | A bill file opened for the 2027 session on large data centers | Drafted for a sponsor; studied in the Economic Development and Workforce Services interim committee | The text is not public yet. It could change reporting, taxes or siting rules for campuses like Meta's. |
| Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment interim committee | Studies energy, air and water bills between sessions | Legislative leadership assigns members | Rep. Logan Monson sits on it. Energy supply for data centers is in its subject area. |
| Environmental Policy Working Group (H.B. 373, 2026) | Meets monthly with the Department of Environmental Quality; its charge includes addressing "industry needs" | Set in the bill | The Division of Air Quality, which is reviewing Aquila's air permit, is part of DEQ. |
| Energy Infrastructure Service District Board (H.B. 514, 2026) | A new district for building energy infrastructure | Set in the bill | Could finance or site power lines and plants serving large users. |
| Nuclear Energy Consortium | Advises on nuclear power in Utah | Set in statute; Sen. Scott Sandall is involved | Meta signed with TerraPower for nuclear plants nationally; Sandall sponsored S.B. 132. |
Forge the Future Project, Meta's PAC, spent $251,446.36 in two 2026 primaries. The records show what each candidate's public roles are. They do not show why Meta chose them.
| Tami Tran (Senate District 6) | Logan Monson (HD-69) | |
|---|---|---|
| Meta PAC spending | $152,503.46 (June 11, 2026) | $98,942.90 (the rest of the $251,446.36) |
| Seat | Open seat; replacing Sen. Jerry Stevenson, a past Executive Appropriations co-chair. His leadership roles do not pass to whoever wins. | Incumbent |
| Public roles that touch this topic | Cyber Security Commission; owns a technology business | Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment interim committee; voted no on S.B. 287; has written about data centers in his newsletter. His disclosure form lists a paid seat on the UAMPS board (a group of city-owned power systems) as a $5,000+ income source. |
| Other links in this site's files | All In For Utah PAC (treasurer Dan Hemmert, whose firm lists Meta as a client) gave $12,037.22 in-kind; Sen. Sandall gave $1,000 (Case 21) | Shares nine donors with Tran, including All In For Utah PAC (Case 21) |
What is safe to say: Meta's PAC filings do not say why it chose these two candidates. Meta's public statements say it backs candidates who support "AI progress." Spending in elections is legal and was reported as the law requires. No record here shows any promise, vote trade or agreement.
IN PLAIN WORDSThese are the big things nobody knows yet. Next to each one is the public place where the answer will show up once it's decided. Anyone can check those places. No request is needed.
| # | The question | Who decides | Where the answer will show up |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Will the state approve the private power contract, and will it drop the rule that Rocky Mountain Power must sign off? | Public Service Commission | PSC Docket 26-2660-01 (application) and rulemaking Docket 25-R318-01, psc.utah.gov |
| 2 | How much air pollution will the plant be allowed to release, and will the public get a comment period? | Division of Air Quality | DAQ public notices (intent to approve, Site 16322), deq.utah.gov |
| 3 | What does the signed city development agreement say, including the blank payment amount? | Eagle Mountain City Council | Council minutes for March 3, 2026 (item 20.B) and later agendas, eaglemountain.gov and utah.gov/pmn |
| 4 | How big will the plant end up: 286 MW, or more? | Will-Power UT / PSC / DAQ | The same PSC and DAQ files as questions 1 and 2 |
| 5 | Who will value the plant for property tax: the state or Utah County? | Utah State Tax Commission / Utah County Assessor | Tax Commission property tax publications; Utah County parcel records |
| 6 | How much water will the new expansion buildings use? | Meta reports; Division of Water Rights publishes | Division of Water Rights website, by Sept. 1 each year (first likely 2027) |
| 7 | What will the 2027 "Large Data Center Amendments" bill say? | Legislature | le.utah.gov, once the bill is numbered and its text is released |
| 8 | Will any Meta or Williams project go before the new Increment Authorization Committee (H.B. 507)? | The committee | Committee meeting agendas, utah.gov/pmn |
IN PLAIN WORDSEach topic gets a letter grade, A (best) to F (worst), on five questions: Does it check power? Can the public see it? Is it clear who pays? What does it do to air, water and land? Do the people affected get a real say? N/A means the question doesn't apply.
Power, transparency, financial accountability, environmental impact, community impact. Each topic graded separately. These grades judge the process and the record, not the company.
HOW TO READ THESEGrades judge only what has already happened: what was filed, said or voted on as of Sept. 23, 2026. PENDING means the decision hasn't been made yet, so there is nothing to grade. Those will be graded once the record exists.
| Criterion | Grade and reason |
|---|---|
| Power | N/AA corporate announcement, not a public decision. |
| Transparency | DThe Sept. 14 post lists renewables, batteries and grants, and omits a gas plant its parent company guarantees on the same campus. |
| Financial accountability | CCommunity payments are itemized; the tax breaks and the gas contract are not mentioned. |
| Environmental impact | PENDINGThe renewable additions are real, but the gas plant's emissions are not public yet. Graded once the state posts the air permit. |
| Community impact | CResidents learn of the plant from city and state filings, not from Meta. |
| Criterion | Grade and reason |
|---|---|
| Power | DA public hearing and recorded vote, but the draft binds the city for 40 years: no new taxes aimed at the plant or the data center industry, frozen rules, limits on nearby residential rezoning, and only the company may end it early. |
| Transparency | DThe draft was posted, but its payment amount was blank, residents' comments were not summarized, all building plans are deemed confidential, and the city must alert the company to any records request. |
| Financial accountability | CThe company buys its own water and pays for upgrades. No decommissioning terms were found. |
| Environmental impact | PENDINGThe draft allows noise above the nighttime limit and sets an effluent cap. The air impact is up to the state and not yet decided. |
| Community impact | CAbove-ground lines and 75 dBA at the property line affect neighbors; the plant is in an industrial zone. |
| Criterion | Grade and reason |
|---|---|
| Power | PENDINGNo decision yet. So far the PSC has held the case until the required declaration is filed, and hired outside reviewers. |
| Transparency | DCustomer name, capacity, price, term, emissions and emergency procedures are all redacted. |
| Financial accountability | PENDINGThe law's test is that ratepayers bear no cost. The PSC hasn't ruled on whether this deal meets it. |
| Environmental impact | N/AAir permitting is DAQ's, not the PSC's. |
| Community impact | PENDINGNo hearing has been held yet. Separately, the applicant has asked the PSC to drop the declaration requirement. |
IN PLAIN WORDSThis is the whole page in two lists: what the records clearly show, and what is still undecided.
Bottom line: nothing in these records shows a rule was broken. What they show is a big energy decision being made in pieces, across a city, two state agencies and the Legislature, while the company's public announcement talks only about clean energy. The questions table above shows where each answer will appear.
IN PLAIN WORDSHere is what the documents don't tell us yet. Nothing on this page claims anyone broke a rule.