Four resident actions to press TCEQ before Pacifico Air Registration 185019 is decided
The latest reviewed TCEQ record shows Registration 185019 pending. A deficiency cycle opened August 21; no approval was posted in the record reviewed August 25. Here are four ways to make your voice heard today.
Ask TCEQ to associate your concern with the project
Send a written objection and request placement in the project record.
This standard-permit registration may not create the ordinary site-specific notice, comment, public-meeting, or contested-case-hearing rights associated with some case-by-case permits. Send a written objection and request for placement in the project record, request a public meeting and the specific mailing lists described below, and ask TCEQ to confirm receipt, association with Project 413471, and which procedural rights apply. This may not constitute formal public comment. If formal notice is later issued, that notice controls the filing method and deadline.
Try TCEQ eComments
Search for Registration 185019. If the system accepts it, submit there and save the confirmation and a copy of your exact text.
Open TCEQ eCommentsUse mail or fax; email a courtesy copy
Mail: Office of the Chief Clerk, MC-105, TCEQ, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087. Fax: 512-239-3311. Also send a courtesy copy to chiefclk@tceq.texas.gov, copying airperm@tceq.texas.gov andpic@tceq.texas.gov, and ask that it be associated with Project 413471. Keep delivery and transmission proof.
Start the courtesy emailRequest the missing record
Email openrecs@tceq.texas.gov and request the exact nonconfidential attachment named Pacifico Cedar Creek SP Application 2026-0813.pdf, plus all existing deficiency letters, responses, and technical reviews as of the request date. Monitor Project 413471 and make a follow-up request for records created later. Include your full name, mailing address, phone or email, Registration 185019, and Project 413471.
Resident filing for Registration 185019 / Project 413471
Use your own location and one truthful, personal impact statement.
I am submitting a written objection and request that TCEQ associate this correspondence with Pacifico CCK Energy 1 LLC, Air NSR Registration 185019 / Project 413471, RN102987831, B & W Ranch / Cedar Creek.
I object to approval before the complete nonconfidential application and a written whole-site eligibility determination are public. Please:
- Produce—or identify the legal basis for withholding—the exact file
Pacifico Cedar Creek SP Application 2026-0813.pdf, which the reviewed index marks “Confidential: No.”- Identify every turbine, generator, phase, megawatt, operating limit, proposed owner or operator, and any relationship relevant to ownership or control of pollutant-emitting activities, and the standard-permit version covered by the registration. Reconcile that inventory with the sealed July 2026 plan's 43 repeated equipment footprints, stating which are included, redundant or non-simultaneous, future, relocated, or excluded, and identifying any enforceable simultaneous-output or operating limits.
- Publish pollutant-by-pollutant, whole-site potential to emit, including, as applicable, startup and shutdown emissions and emissions from any black-start, auxiliary, diesel, tank, or chemical-handling sources, and explain the source-boundary and aggregation analysis.
- Explain in writing how the project qualifies under 30 TAC §§116.610(b) and (c) and the particular Electric Generating Unit Standard Permit version TCEQ is applying.
- Hold a public meeting and, using my full name and mailing address, add me to the Permit List and Permit's Permanent Mailing List for Registration 185019, the Bastrop County mailing list, and any available email notice list. Please state which lists exist and what comment, meeting, hearing, and post-decision rights apply, including the legal basis for any right TCEQ says is unavailable.
My full name is ____. My mailing address is ____. My phone or email is ____. I live/work/attend school/own property approximately ____ from the site. My specific concern is: ____.
Please do not approve the registration before responding to these requests.
Save your address, distance and direction from the site, how you use the property, how often you are there, specific health or property-use concerns, and any dated maps or photos that support those facts. Share only the personal information needed for the agency record.
Evidence behind the requestThe reviewed TCEQ production omits a listed nonconfidential attachment.
These are record-based questions for TCEQ—not conclusions about what the agency must ultimately decide.
Explore
The reviewed TCEQ production omits a listed nonconfidential attachment.
These are record-based questions for TCEQ—not conclusions about what the agency must ultimately decide.
TCEQ's records production omitted the principal application attachment even though Pacifico's own STEERS filing marked that file “Confidential: No.” TCEQ should produce it immediately or identify the specific legal basis for not doing so. The file is named Pacifico Cedar Creek SP Application 2026-0813.pdf.
Separately, TCEQ referred applicant-claimed confidential material, packaged in its Attorney General submission as “Attachment C,” for review on August 24. The available production does not establish that Attachment C is the missing nonconfidential application or that it matches exactly Pacifico's separately indexed confidential Appendix B; the referral itself does not establish confidentiality. Emission data must remain public and segregable even when embedded in protected material.
40 C.F.R. §2.301 on emission dataA sealed July 2026 plan depicts 43 repeated equipment footprints in the power-generation area. A cross-document visual mapping suggests eight larger-form and 35 compact-form positions, but the plan itself does not assign turbine types, phases, or a final permitted inventory to those footprints.
One arithmetic match is 8 × 76.4 MW plus 6 × 16.5 MW = 710.2 MW. If that is the configuration covered by the registration, the cross-document mapping leaves 29 additional compact-form footprints—equal to 478.5 MW only if the separate labeled layout's 16.5 MW rating applies. TCEQ should explain whether they are included as redundant or non-simultaneous units, future phases, relocated, excluded, or subject to enforceable operating limits.
The new records describe linked power and data-center infrastructure, one combined drainage model, two coordinated detention-pond/outfall systems, and a common downstream receiving stream and analysis point. That supports a whole-site source-boundary inquiry; it is not proof of common control or a single legal air source.
Turn outreach into written deliverables
Press Gerdes and Schwertner for public, time-bound follow-through.
Representative Stan Gerdes's August 21 letter already asks TCEQ for a public meeting and a written explanation of standard-permit eligibility. Senator Charles Schwertner's staff reportedly has contacted TCEQ, but no parallel signed letter appears in the records reviewed. The resident ask is simple: ask each office whether TCEQ has answered. If it has not, ask the office to contact TCEQ again that day and keep following up until it receives a written answer. Then ask the office to share that answer publicly. Neither legislator decides the permit, but both can press the agency and create a public oversight record.
Representative Stan Gerdes
Thank him for writing, then ask: “Has TCEQ answered your office?” If not, ask his office to contact TCEQ again and keep following up until it gets a written answer. Ask the office to tell residents what it has done and whether TCEQ replied within 48 hours.
Senator Charles Schwertner
Ask: “Has TCEQ answered your staff?” If not, ask the Senator to contact TCEQ again and send a signed follow-up letter. Ask his office to tell residents what it has done and whether TCEQ replied within 48 hours.
Official office pageYou are asking the two elected offices to take these steps with TCEQ and report back. The 48-hour request is for each office to tell residents what it did and whether TCEQ answered; it is not a 48-hour deadline for TCEQ to decide the permit.
- Tell residents whether TCEQ has answered the office.
- If TCEQ has not answered, contact TCEQ again that day and keep following up until the office receives a written response.
- Obtain and publish TCEQ's written response on standard-permit eligibility and the status of a public meeting.
- Ask TCEQ not to approve Registration 185019 until the indexed nonconfidential application is produced and a written whole-site determination reconciles the equipment and phases.
- Request same-day notice to the offices and public if TCEQ posts a technical disposition, signed approval, denial, or other final action.
- Request EPA Region 6 review if counsel or an air engineer identifies a supported federal major-source or Prevention of Significant Deterioration issue.
- Ask Anthropic, Pacifico, and BlackChamber to voluntarily confirm or deny the reported talks, explain any proposed operating or control structure, and state whether the commitment attributed to Anthropic in the Governor's August 14 announcement would cover Cedar Creek.
Thank you for your August 21 letter about Pacifico Air Registration 185019 / Project 413471. Has TCEQ answered your office? If not, please contact TCEQ again today and keep following up until your office receives a written answer. Please ask TCEQ not to approve the registration until the indexed nonconfidential application is public and TCEQ provides a written whole-site eligibility determination. Please share TCEQ's answer, the public-meeting status, and a brief update with constituents within 48 hours.Click to email Rep. Gerdes
Has TCEQ answered your office about Pacifico Air Registration 185019 / Project 413471? If not, please contact TCEQ again today and keep following up until your office receives a written answer. Please send and publish a signed follow-up letter asking TCEQ not to approve the registration until the indexed nonconfidential application is public and TCEQ provides a written whole-site eligibility determination. Please share TCEQ's answer, the public-meeting status, and a brief update with constituents within 48 hours.Click to email Sen. Schwertner
Use the County's formal voice
Ask Commissioners Court to finish the permit-specific work.
Bastrop County cannot grant, deny, or stay this state air registration. Texas Health & Safety Code §382.112 does allow a local government to make a recommendation about a TCEQ determination affecting its jurisdiction, and requires the Commission to give that recommendation maximum consideration. Ask for a formal recommendation that TCEQ not approve the registration until the record and whole-site analysis are complete.
Read §382.112 in the Texas statutesThe broader resolution passed. The Pacifico-specific amendment did not.
According to LIV's August 24 post-meeting account, Commissioners Court passed the broader data-center resolution that LIV supported. The County's official agenda packet confirms the general text considered; a signed resolution and certified minutes were not posted when Lost Pines Watch checked August 25. The vote did not add the permit-specific friendly amendment advanced by Elgin attorney Nick Lealos, Cedar Creek residents Merrie Santana and Lucy Dyess, town-hall organizers, and other residents. That amendment asked the County to press TCEQ for a more rigorous review of Pacifico's pending air registration.
That vote did not close the door. Texas Local Government Code §81.005 provides that a special term of Commissioners Court may be called by the County Judge or by three commissioners. Under the current Texas Open Meetings Act, notice generally must be posted at least three business days before the scheduled meeting date. The Court would then have to vote at a properly posted open meeting. County counsel should confirm the agenda language and timing.
Call and post a special meeting
Politely ask the County Judge—or any three commissioners—to place a Pacifico-specific air-resolution item on the earliest legally permissible special-meeting agenda.
Ask TCEQ to decide the correct pathway
The County cannot “convert” the registration itself. Ask it to urge TCEQ to determine whether the whole project qualifies for the standard permit and to require the applicable case-by-case NSR process—including major NSR if triggered—when the legal thresholds require it.
Keep the message respectful and specific
Thank the Court for passing the broader resolution, identify the unfinished Pacifico air-permit request, and ask for a written response. A coordinated, factual email record is more useful than angry or personal messages.
Pursuant to Texas Health and Safety Code §382.112, Bastrop County recommends that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality take no final action approving Pacifico CCK Energy 1 LLC Air NSR Registration 185019 / Project 413471 until: (1) the complete nonconfidential application, including the indexed file Pacifico Cedar Creek SP Application 2026-0813.pdf, is publicly available; (2) the Executive Director publishes a written whole-site determination addressing potential to emit, source aggregation and boundaries, all persons proposed to own, operate, or control pollutant-emitting activities, and any tenant or contractual relationship relevant to common control or support-facility analysis, the applicable standard-permit version, all equipment and phases, and the enforceability of every operating or emissions limit; (3) TCEQ reconciles the sealed July 2026 power-plant layout with the equipment covered by the registration; and (4) TCEQ holds a public meeting or explains in writing the legal basis for declining one. If TCEQ determines that the complete project cannot qualify for the standard permit or triggers major NSR, the County requests that TCEQ require the applicable case-by-case authorization and every public-notice and participation opportunity required by law.Thank you for adopting the August 24 data-center resolution. Please call and post a special Commissioners Court meeting to consider a Pacifico-specific recommendation under Texas Health and Safety Code §382.112. Ask TCEQ not to approve Registration 185019 until the complete nonconfidential application and a written whole-site eligibility determination are public. If TCEQ determines that the project cannot qualify for the standard permit or triggers major NSR, ask the agency to require the applicable case-by-case authorization and public process. I understand the County does not decide or convert the permit; I am asking it to use its formal statutory voice on the earliest legally permissible agenda.
Ask the Governor to address the TCEQ gap
Contact Governor Abbott and ask him to press TCEQ to pause action.
Governor Abbott's August 3 data-center directive focuses on projects advancing through ERCOT's interconnection process; it did not pause TCEQ air permitting. Ask the Governor to publicly urge TCEQ to take no final action on Pacifico Air Registration 185019 / Project 413471 until residents can review the complete nonconfidential record and receive a meaningful public-participation process.
Send the Governor's contact form
Choose an environmental or general-policy topic if the form requests one. Put Pacifico Air Registration 185019 / Project 413471near the top, add your name and community, and save a copy or screenshot of what you submit.
Open the Governor's official contact page512-463-2000
Ask the office to record your message for Governor Abbott and request a written response. Be polite, identify yourself as a Bastrop County resident or affected community member, and use both permit numbers.
Call the Governor's officeThe Governor does not personally decide this registration. Ask him to use his public platform and oversight influence to urge TCEQ not to approve it until the agency releases the complete nonconfidential application, publishes its written whole-site eligibility determination, and holds a public meeting with every comment or hearing opportunity available under law—or explains in writing why a requested process is unavailable.
Governor Abbott, please ask TCEQ to take no final action approving Pacifico CCK Energy 1 LLC Air Registration 185019 / Project 413471 until the public can review the complete nonconfidential application—including the principal application attachment that Pacifico's own filing marked “Confidential: No”—and TCEQ publishes a written whole-site eligibility determination addressing all equipment, phases, emissions, operating limits, and relevant ownership or control relationships.
Please also urge TCEQ to hold a public meeting and provide every public-notice, comment, and hearing opportunity available under law, or explain in writing the legal basis for any process it says is unavailable. This proposed 710-megawatt onsite gas power plant would be placed in an established Cedar Creek community. Residents should be able to see the record and be heard before the agency acts.
Keep the record credibleFour things not to overstate
Explore
Four things not to overstate
- The 43-footprint plan is not proof that 43 turbines will be built or permitted.
- The 710 MW project scale does not, by itself, prove standard-permit ineligibility or major-source status.
- Shared infrastructure supports a source-boundary inquiry; it does not by itself prove common control or one legal source.
- The registration is pending, not approved. No reviewed record establishes an automatic September deadline or automatic right to begin construction after 45 days.
Official process sourcesAgency, statutory, and procedural references
Explore
Agency, statutory, and procedural references
New-record findings above are drawn from the reviewed TCEQ PIR production, the five-page STEERS cover and attachment index, the sealed July 2026 Cedar Creek Power Plant plan set, the Pacifico JETI filings, and coordinated site and drainage records.
Anthropic is reportedly in talks to become an occupant at the Cedar Creek development.
KXAN, republishing Austin Business Journal reporting, says several sources identified Anthropic PBC as being in talks to become a tenant or occupant at the 2,842-acre Cedar Creek development. Sources said Anthropic has worked with BlackChamber Partners and Pacifico Energy on the project. The report expressly says no agreement has been finalized. Public records reviewed by Lost Pines Watch as of August 25 do not name or establish Anthropic as the tenant, operator, air-permit applicant, owner, or controlling entity.
It supplies the first publicly reported prospective occupant associated with the project and reports that sources linked Anthropic to both BlackChamber and Pacifico in discussions about the development.
No project agreement has been announced or confirmed; the report says no agreement has been finalized. It does not establish who would own, operate, control, or bear environmental responsibility for each part.
TCEQ should determine whether any reported relationship bears on who owns, operates, or controls pollutant-emitting activities, or on a support-facility or source-boundary analysis. Prospective tenant identity alone does not prove common control or aggregation.
Keep the wording precise: the report describes talks, not a finalized lease. It does not make Anthropic the confirmed tenant, permit applicant, operator, or controlling entity.
Get urgent local alerts without relying on social feeds.
Join for meaningful meeting, permit, record, and decision updates. This is a focused local list, not a daily newsletter.