The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers chose not to hold a public hearing on Google’s Botetourt County data center project even though it received almost 300 requests for one amid new developments with the application process.
Federal policy includes language that a hearing be held unless “the issues raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served” by one.
The chief of public affairs at the Corps’ Norfolk District office, Mark Haviland, said by email to Cardinal News on Tuesday that the district commander decided a hearing would “not provide additional relevant information within the Corps’ regulatory authority,” even after 282 submissions came in requesting one during a public notice period in the spring. Google application documents posted to the Corps’ website include more letters seeking a hearing that were sent in September.
And after the spring public notice period ended, Google continued to send multiple application materials at the state Department of Environmental Quality’s request — even after the head of the DEQ said to disregard incomplete applications without approved exceptions.
Google recently broke ground and grading has started on its data center campus in Botetourt County’s Greenfield Industrial Park. Another Google data center has recently been announced for a Roanoke County technology park.
The Corps is a branch of the U.S. military that provides engineering services. The Norfolk division, on March 10, published a notice soliciting public comment on a January 2026 permit application from Google for “Project Raspberry,” the three-data center campus planned for Botetourt.
Gary Larrowe, Botetourt County administrator, said Thursday that he doesn’t have any comments pertaining to the Corps’ denial of a hearing, as it is outside of the county’s responsibilities.
“I feel certain that [Google] has mitigated everything associated with the site. I have no reason to believe they have not done that,” Larrowe said.
The economic development performance agreement between Botetourt and Helio Capital LLC, the limited liability company behind the project, states that the county “shall provide expedited permitting for the Facility and each Data Center,” including site development permits, building permits, environmental permits, special exception permits and operational permits.
“All permit review will commence no later than five business days following initial submission,” the agreement states.
Larrowe said this is a standard process — “It’s not saying we’ll fast-track everything. It’s saying we have a standard to try to get things started and done for Botetourt.”
The notice stated that infrastructure built would include access roads, utilities, stormwater management facilities and parking areas in addition to the three data centers, substations and an office building. The notice also listed additional environmental impacts of the project from Google — that had not yet been verified — including removal of about 120 acres of forested habitat within the range of an endangered species, the Indiana bat, according to project documents.
The public comment period lasted from March 10 until April 9, and during that time, the Corps received “substantial input,” Haviland wrote in his Tuesday email. That included the 282 requests for a Corps public hearing, he said.
In his email, Haviland wrote that comments the Corps received expressed concerns related to impacts to water and other environmental and “‘public interest considerations.”
“These concerns were documented in the administrative record and informed the Corps’ subsequent regulatory review,” he wrote. The Corps requested more information from Google on May 20, addressing “several substantive issues” raised by the public, he wrote.
Haviland wrote that the decision to not hold a hearing doesn’t constitute “approval” of the proposed project or “diminish the consideration given to public comments.”
The Corps’ Norfolk division did not hold any public hearings for this data center project. Public hearings and information sessions were held by the Botetourt Board of Supervisors and at Western Virginia Water Authority meetings.
Kathryn Hatam, a member of a local opposition group, the Southwest Virginia Data Center Transparency Alliance, said in an interview Wednesday that there was new information presented after the public comment period closed that should have been discussed during a public hearing.
According to the permit application documents, found on the Virginia Marine Resource Commission’s website and on the Corps’ notice, multiple documents were posted after the close of the comment period.
Google also announced in July that it would use air cooling instead of water cooling in at least one of the three data centers.
On April 15, Amanda Lee, environmental scientist with the Timmons Group, the environmental and site design consultant for the Google project, responded by email to multiple questions from the DEQ and the Corps, according to the documents posted. Those questions and requests for more information from the DEQ included:
— A detailed map depicting the location of the site with the project boundary and existing preservation areas on site.
— A compensatory mitigation plan to achieve “no net loss of wetland acreage and functions or stream functions and water quality benefits.”
— Field verification of the submitted stream assessments, requiring a site visit. Google stated in its response that the visit had already happened.
— Additional information and studies for stream crossings utilizing culverts. Google stated there are no proposed stream crossings using culverts.
— Questions regarding justification for the number of parking spots and total development footprint. DEQ asked about several options to reduce the project’s total footprint that Google said would not be possible.
Google did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
On April 28, Shawn Crist, Virginia Water Protection project manager with the DEQ, notified Google and Lee that the DEQ could not process the information Google submitted on April 15, citing an April 20 memo from DEQ Director Michael Rolband to the DEQ.
In that memo, Rolband said, “Effective immediately, staff should not process incomplete applications unless the regional director or division director approves an exception. Staff efforts should focus on complete applications.” The same direction went for projects that are “administratively complete but technically difficult” and projects that do not meet regulatory requirements. The memo said by June 15, each program should develop procedures for denial of such projects.
A June 30 emailed memo from Crist to Zach Miller, with Google, states that Google submitted additional information in both April and June and that the DEQ was currently evaluating its application for a Virginia water protection permit. Crist asked that Google respond with additional information by July 15. One of the additional requests refers to proposed stream crossings using culverts, which Google previously stated it had no plans for. Crist wrote back that in the initial application, culvert crossings were, indeed, a part of the project design.
Lee later wrote back on July 15 that there were no longer culvert crossings in the plan and responded to other questions and requests for more information.
Irina Calos, communications supervisor with the DEQ, said in an email Thursday that the DEQ has “continued to request and review additional application materials but has not yet received a complete application” from Google.
The DEQ’s webpage for the project states that two permits are currently under review: the Virginia water protection permit as well as a minor new source review permit, which involves emission levels, that was submitted by Google in May.
Also included in public documents were several requests for public hearings from citizens. Kate Berding wrote to the Corps in September that the map submitted by Google “contradicts” the map she’s seen in the Botetourt County Courthouse.
“One map is a lie and we all know which one,” she wrote.
Susan Thompson wrote in September that “important facts about the project were not public when comments closed” on April 9. She said Google’s application “declared that they did not know of any protected streams,” though according to Thompson, certain streams at Greenfield are protected in records at the courthouse and that “the Corps is named in it.”
Hatam expressed frustration on Wednesday that she believes the DEQ is “choosing not to hold a $4 billion company to the same standard that they would for any small or regular-sized business that was seeking applications.”
“And in this case, the public interest and possible harm is so extreme that to deny public hearings is a gross mismanagement and miscarriage of justice,” Hatam said.
The code of federal regulations states that when the public requests a hearing, the district engineer of the Corps may “expeditiously attempt to resolve the issues informally” or, otherwise, “shall promptly” schedule a hearing. And the statute includes the stipulation that hearings shall be granted unless the issues raised are insubstantial.
Also, requests must state “with particularity” the reason why the resident would like a hearing. Haviland did not specify whether any requests lacked a reason. Hatam, who said the Alliance sent many requests for a hearing, said in a text message Thursday that she thinks “most if not all” of the requests sent from her network would have a reason included.
“In case of doubt, a public hearing shall be held,” the statute states.
