US gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers by removing requirements for public input on pollution — EPA change would allow air pollution permits without publicizing them

The U.S. government is looking to move a critical transparency step in the approval of data centers behind closed doors. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has plans to remove a requirement that forces states to seek public feedback on applications for air pollution permits, as reported by The New York Times. The change, if it goes into effect, would apply to a subset of air pollution permits. However, the primary concern is around data centers, as local communities seek to delay, or outright ban, AI data center construction.

The latest proposal applies to permits for a "minor source" of air pollution, which includes landfills, laundromats, steel mills, and, of course, data centers. However, recent analysis of the expansion of AI data centers suggests that environmental impact is growing. The Harvard School of Public Health estimated that the Vantage data center in Loudoun County, Virginia, contributed between $53 million and $99 million in annual health damages, the largest estimate for any single facility ever.

In another example, the analysis conducted by researcher Michael Cork directly influenced a proposal in Fluvanna County, Virginia, to expand a fossil fuel plant. The expansion was ultimately denied based on the findings from the analysis that "shaped the public discussion leading up to the... vote."

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware

The proposal from the EPA would remove, or at least create the opportunity for states to remove, the public discussion that shapes these decisions. The EPA's stance has been that these minor sources don't require federal oversight. However, there's a clear gap when a federal agency decides to stop enforcing federal rules and asks states to step in to make their own decisions.

The Attorneys General from 14 states and three cities signed an open letter opposing the change, writing, "despite the name, even 'minor' sources can pose significant health and environmental impacts." The letter suggests that removing the required publicization of permit applications and 30-day comment period "sidelines these fundamental transparency and democratic safeguards in the name of administrative expediency and relieving regulatory burdens, particularly for accelerating the buildout of data centers and other artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure."

Although the EPA requires a public comment period after an air pollution permit application, the process has been circumvented in some cases.

In Gilroy, California, an Amazon data center began construction last month without the knowledge of many residents. A years-long approval process between the city and Amazon meant the public comment period had lapsed two years before construction began, leaving the public little time to react. In another case, residents of Festus, Missouri sued the city, arguing that it didn't give the public enough time to review a data center proposal before moving forward with it.

With the EPA's proposed change, responsibility for regulating data centers is placed on the states. Current environmental law allows states to impose stricter environmental standards than the federal minimum, provided the state does not fall below it. The EPA change would allow a state to eliminate the public comment period, since it's not required by federal law.

Currently, a public comment period is still required. The proposed change would go into effect within the next year.

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Jake Roach
Senior Analyst, CPUs

Jake Roach is the Senior CPU Analyst at Tom’s Hardware, writing reviews, news, and features about the latest consumer and workstation processors.

  • criticaloftom
    Yeah because that will stop those damn protesters. *meanwhile crowd Silently rolls out guillotine and molotov cocktails*
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Of the Shareholders, by the Shareholders and for the Shareholders. 'MURRICA!

    Lincoln must be crying in heaven, heck.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • blppt
    Oh this is a great idea for popularity.

    Meanwhile, even GREG ABBOTT has flipped 180 on his bullish data center push, realizing what a hotbed this topic is at the moment.
    Reply
  • Faiakes
    In case there was ever any doubt about who these people work for....
    Reply
  • Concerned Liberty
    So this is what "radical transparency" looks like.
    Reply
  • Paul Revere
    Admin said:
    A proposed change to the EPA's regulations would remove the requirement for states to seek public input on air pollution permits, particularly around AI data centers.

    U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers by removing requirements for public input on pollution — EPA change would allow air pollution... : Read more
    One world order will not be stopped by common peasants
    Reply
  • Lamarr the Strelok
    It's been a long 2 years. The incredible selfishness here in the US is remarkable.Many will accept anything as long as it doesn't affect them. Raising their electricity bills? Yep, now people "care".
    Reply
  • hush now
    so polluting unsuspecting communities with a data center they don't want is a right for corporations now? do people really still think this country or government is for the people?
    Reply
  • Bearscat
    I don't know when Tom's hardware got into this, but I'm glad. Thank you for paying attention and for bringing it to ours about yet another authoritarian stab at legally required public input and for that matter almost everything legally required. There is nothing "minor" about the impact of data centers on people's health as you document here, especially when they occur in places where people have little input or means to get away from them. This government cares nothing for human well-being if it isn't their own hides being risked. It's unconscionable. Vote them out at every level of government. We cannot take our eyes off the ball.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    This is right in line with pretty much every other decision that has come out of the EPA (and many other federal agencies) in the last couple of years. It's all driving to create a two US system because of these things being shifted to state level. I fail to see why people are in favor of dismantling the federal system, but apparently there are enough bootlickers doing billionaires bidding.

    If there's a positive to be had regarding data centers it's that people have been universally getting screwed on electricity costs for long enough now having a target for that anger means even in the business above all states they're having to be mindful.
    Reply