Pre-Litigation Investigation — No complaint has been filed

Data Center Water Rights & Community Harm

A nationwide mass-tort, public-trust, and water-rights investigation

Digital infrastructure can serve the public without quietly transferring scarce water, public utility capacity, and drought risk to private operators. This investigation is building a verified national record of communities, well owners, farmers, Tribal water holders, ratepayers, businesses, and local governments that may have suffered concrete harm connected to a data center’s water withdrawal, cooling system, wastewater, infrastructure agreement, or regulatory approval.

The principle

Water is a shared life-sustaining resource. A company may receive permission to use water, but permission should not become private sovereignty over a community’s supply. Domestic access, existing lawful users, ecosystems, Tribal rights, and the long-term stability of the watershed must be protected before public institutions commit water or infrastructure to industrial expansion.

Why this investigation is necessary

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimated that U.S. data centers directly consumed approximately 66 billion liters of water in 2023—about 17.4 billion gallons—with hyperscale and colocation facilities accounting for approximately 84% of that total. The same report estimated an indirect water footprint of nearly 800 billion liters from electricity generation. These are national estimates, not proof that any particular facility caused a local injury.

The Government Accountability Office has also warned that estimates of AI-related water consumption remain limited and that companies generally do not disclose enough facility-level detail. Without transparent local information, residents may be asked to accept major water commitments before they can evaluate the effect on wells, utility rates, drought resilience, agriculture, or future growth.

Data centers are not all alike. Cooling technology, climate, water source, operating practices, and electricity supply can produce very different impacts. Some facilities rely heavily on evaporative cooling and potable water; others use air cooling, closed-loop systems, or reclaimed water. This investigation will follow evidence—not assume that every data center causes the same harm.

What we are investigating

Water depletion and loss of access

Declining private-well levels, reduced pressure, dry wells, or higher pumping costs
Aquifer drawdown, reduced streamflow, subsidence, or interference with senior and existing users
Water restrictions imposed on residents or agriculture while industrial allocations remain protected

Public cost shifted to ratepayers

Water, sewer, treatment, pipeline, or storage expansions financed by existing customers
Preferential rates, rebates, tax incentives, or minimum-use guarantees negotiated without meaningful disclosure
Higher household bills, connection fees, or public debt linked to large-load infrastructure

Wastewater and contamination

Cooling-tower blowdown, treatment chemicals, fuel releases, or other discharges that violate permits or damage property
Changes in taste, odor, color, sediment, or tested water quality after facility construction or operation
Improper handling, storage, treatment, or disposal of wastes that may endanger health or the environment

Secrecy, permitting, and unequal treatment

Confidential water-use agreements or incomplete public disclosure of projected demand
Approvals based on unrealistic demand, drought, recharge, or wastewater assumptions
Failure to consult affected communities, protect Tribal rights, enforce permit conditions, or conduct required environmental review

How a nationwide case must be structured

Water law is not uniform nationwide. Eastern states commonly use versions of riparian rights, western states commonly use prior appropriation, groundwater rules vary widely, and public-trust protections differ by jurisdiction. For that reason, this campaign is a national evidence and coordination effort—but viable complaints will ordinarily need to be organized by facility, watershed, defendant, state law, and injured plaintiff.

Multiple federal cases sharing common factual questions may qualify for coordinated pretrial proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 1407. That process is not automatic, does not erase state-law differences, and does not replace the need to prove each plaintiff’s injury, causation, and available remedy.

The Ninth Amendment expresses the principle that listing certain rights does not deny other rights retained by the people. Under current doctrine, however, it is generally not treated as a stand-alone damages statute. Any court filing should pair the retained- rights and popular-sovereignty argument with recognized claims grounded in concrete injury and applicable water, property, tort, utility, environmental, administrative, Tribal, civil-rights, and public-trust law.

Legal theories under review

State water-right, groundwater-management, reasonable-use, and permit violations.
Private or public nuisance, negligence, trespass, property damage, and interference with lawful water use.
Public-trust, state constitutional, Tribal reserved-rights, and consultation claims where applicable.
Utility-rate, public-contract, procurement, open-records, due-process, and environmental-review violations.
Clean Water Act claims where there is an unlawful discharge or permit violation. Large water consumption by itself is not a Clean Water Act violation.
RCRA claims where handling or disposal of solid or hazardous waste may present an imminent and substantial endangerment. Water use alone is not enough.

Who should submit a declaration

Submit information when you have a specific facility, approval, contract, withdrawal, discharge, or measurable community impact to report. Useful declarants may include:

Residents, homeowners, tenants, private-well owners, and municipal water customers.
Farmers, ranchers, nurseries, food producers, and water-dependent local businesses.
Tribal members, governments, and organizations protecting reserved or culturally significant waters.
Utility employees, contractors, engineers, public officials, and whistleblowers with firsthand knowledge.
Community groups documenting approvals, rate impacts, drought planning, or environmental injustice.

Evidence to preserve

•Well-depth, pump, pressure, and water-quality records

•Water and sewer bills before and after facility activity

•Drought restrictions, shutoff notices, and utility communications

•Permits, environmental reviews, water contracts, meeting minutes, and public-record responses

•Photographs, dated videos, maps, property records, crop or livestock loss records

•Testing results from accredited laboratories and chain-of-custody documents

•Names of witnesses and a dated timeline of events

•Public statements that conflict with later measured use or disclosed agreements

Preserve original records. Do not alter metadata, trespass, access protected systems, or obtain documents unlawfully.

Relief this campaign may seek

Public disclosure of actual and projected water withdrawal, consumption, source, discharge, and drought plans.
Independent baseline testing and continuous monitoring paid for by the facility—not local residents.
Developer-funded water, wastewater, and resilience infrastructure with protections against stranded costs.
Use of reclaimed or non-potable water where safe, feasible, and not harmful to other public needs.
Operational limits, permit enforcement, or injunctive relief where unlawful or imminent harm is proven.
Restoration and compensation for well replacement, property damage, agricultural loss, business loss, and other proven injuries.
Priority protection for essential household use, existing lawful users, ecosystems, and Tribal water rights.

Add your evidence to the national record

A declaration is most useful when it identifies the facility, location, timing, water source, measurable impact, and records that may corroborate the harm.

Submit a Water Harm Declaration

Research and legal sources

Important legal notice

This page announces an evidence-gathering and legal-review initiative. It does not accuse every data center of wrongdoing, state that a lawsuit has been filed, guarantee that any claim will be accepted, or create an attorney-client relationship. Legal rights and filing deadlines vary by jurisdiction. Anyone facing an active deadline, unsafe water, property damage, or immediate health concern should contact qualified local counsel and the appropriate public agency without waiting for this campaign.