Trump’s EPA Proposes Allowing Data Centers to Conceal Air Pollution Emissions
As new data centers face increasing pushback from local communities, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is set to make it more challenging for residents to voice concerns about pollution generated by these facilities. The EPA intends to eliminate a federal regulation that mandates public notification and the opportunity for community feedback when certain industrial sites seek air permits. Advocates warn that this change would enable data center developers and other industries to commence construction without informing nearby residents or allowing them to express their opinions.
Keri Powell, a senior attorney and air program leader at the Southern Environmental Law Center, notes, “You can see why that would be so interesting to an administration that wants to rush through the construction of data centers. What the EPA would be allowing is for all of those facilities to proceed without public engagement, issuing permits in secrecy. Nobody knows what’s happening until the bulldozers arrive.”
The proposed changes target a permitting process known as New Source Review, which has been in effect since the 1970s and applies to various facilities, including landfills, paper mills, and power plant expansions. With the rise of generative AI, these permits have become a contentious issue, particularly concerning new data centers and the power plants needed to supply electricity to them.
In July, the EPA announced plans to remove the federal public participation requirement for a broad category of polluters, shifting the responsibility to state and local air agencies. This change raises concerns that many of these agencies may skip the public notification process entirely. Air pollution is typically regulated at the federal level due to its potential to travel across state lines, impacting residents far from the pollution source.
EPA administrator Lee Zeldin stated, “The state and local authorities closest to the issues and the public should be making the decisions on the permitting process as much as possible, not Washington. We are cutting unnecessary and burdensome red tape.”
The changes will affect so-called “minor” sources of pollution, which the EPA describes as having relatively low emissions and limited environmental impact. However, Powell’s organization argues that the “minor” designation is misleading, as the permitting process often encompasses projects that can significantly affect local communities.
For instance, Colossus 1, xAI’s extensive data center in Tennessee, which the company claimed was the “most powerful AI training system yet,” applied for a minor source permit in 2025. This application prompted a public hearing and generated thousands of comments in response to a notice from the local health department. The SELC and NAACP even threatened legal action against xAI for installing unpermitted gas turbines at the site that same year.
SELC was among nearly 200 health and environmental organizations that submitted comments urging the EPA to retract its proposal regarding New Source Review. They argue that requiring public comment allows residents to provide essential insights into the potential impacts of new data centers or industrial facilities.
Byron Gary, Senior Attorney at the Kentucky Resources Council, emphasized, “[The EPA’s proposal] could deprive the agencies making decisions about these [pollution] sources of the necessary lived experience data from those communities. Without that information, it is impossible for permitting agencies to evaluate the full, cumulative impact of these facilities.”
The public comment period for the EPA’s proposal concluded last week, and EPA spokesperson Carolyn Holran indicated that they are currently reviewing the over 4,900 comments submitted before finalizing the rule.
