Community concerns.

Land use and zoning

Loudoun County reported significant opposition to data center development at the Amazon GWU campus and announced preliminary alternative use terms. The county described an intent to withdraw the data center application while final agreements still required negotiation. This records attributed opposition and a preliminary response, not a completed withdrawal or a finding of environmental harm.

Record status: Unknown. The bounded review establishes the documented action and attributed statements only. It does not establish final resolution of underlying public concerns, present compliance or measured site effects.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

October 22, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 22, 2026

The exact day on which the underlying opposition was raised is not established. The October 20 board negotiation action is a separate dated procedural event. October 22, 2026 is the county release publication date. It is not the first day of the underlying public opposition.

Raised or recorded by Loudoun County.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Water use · Power and electric rates · Land use and zoning

City of San Diego published concerns raised by the Mayor about potential data center demands on water, electricity costs, housing opportunities, infrastructure and neighborhoods while directing staff to prepare regulations and a proposed pause. The statement concerns City policy within San Diego County. It does not enact the future Council proposal, establish actual utility increases or find harm at an individual facility.

Record status: Unknown. The selected official record documents institutional concerns and a regulatory review context. Their current resolution, actual environmental or utility effects, individual project eligibility and later legal changes remain unverified. A policy pause does not establish that a concern was resolved.

Event date

October 22, 2026

Source publication date

October 22, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 23, 2026

The official account expressly dates this institutional public statement October 22, 2026. This is not the first earlier community complaint, a final Council vote or the moratorium effective day. The source expressly dates its public statement. This is separate from a legal effective day or the first earlier community complaint.

Raised or recorded by City of San Diego.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Noise · Land use and zoning · Power and electric rates · Other

Smithfield Township consulting engineer T&M Associates requested additional Smithfield Gateway conditional use information and identified unresolved issues in the sound analysis, modeled equipment and barrier dimensions, electrical disturbance review and project information. These are technical application comments, not findings of actual noise from an operating facility or a final conditional use denial. The later published applicant correspondence offers revisions and a procedural hearing schedule without establishing completed compliance.

Record status: Unknown. The bounded review establishes the documented action and attributed statements only. It does not establish final resolution of underlying public concerns, present compliance or measured site effects.

Event date

September 11, 2026

Source publication date

September 11, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 23, 2026

The technical review letter is dated September 11, 2026. This is the date printed on the original agency document. The first online posting day was not independently established.

Raised or recorded by Smithfield Township consulting engineer.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Land use and zoning

KIOW reported a county supervisor's account that a landowner was withdrawing from a proposed MCNI data-center land deal. Its earlier report described public opposition and an appealable agricultural-to-industrial rezoning denial. These are the outlet's accounts, not independently inspected land, zoning or appeal records, formal project withdrawal or a final environmental determination.

Record status: Unknown. The later formal application or appeal disposition is unknown in this bounded review. A reported landowner decision about a business deal is distinct from a verified project withdrawal, final agency appeal outcome or resolution of every land-use objection.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

October 17, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The newer report does not establish an exact executed withdrawal, filing or agency event day. The earlier relative Wednesday vote description is not converted to an unverified exact date. The original current report JSON-LD records October 17, 2026 publication and a later same-day modification. The earlier report is dated September 10, 2026. Neither substitutes for an unverified formal filing day.

Raised or recorded by KIOW.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Air and generators · Health

Southern Environmental Law Center reported filing a request for a contested-case hearing on Valara's air permit, alleging errors in emissions calculations and public participation. It requested remand and restrictions on turbine construction. These are counsel's account, allegations and requested relief, not court findings or an independently inspected injunction.

Record status: Unknown. The current court disposition is unknown in this bounded review. Counsel reported filing a request; the requested remand and construction restriction are not an order, verified injunction or final merits outcome.

Event date

October 16, 2026

Source publication date

October 16, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The counsel release expressly states that it filed the request that day, October 16, 2026. This is the filing counsel's stated date; no independent court stamp or docket acceptance was inspected. The original counsel release is explicitly dated October 16, 2026. Publication of the actual filed request packet and an original signed permit was not established.

Raised or recorded by Southern Environmental Law Center.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Water use · Land use and zoning

Oklahoma Public Media Exchange reported Osage tribal officials' questions about water and consultation for Google's proposed Project Spring in Sand Springs. An October follow-up reported that a separate tribal-approval bill did not become law. These are outlet accounts; that legislative outcome does not establish project approval or resolution of the water questions.

Record status: Unknown. The present mineral-lease and project disposition and outcome of the documented water questions are unknown in this bounded review. OPMX reported that a separate approval-authority bill did not become law. That report is not a verified project approval, denial, final lease decision or resolution of every concern.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

October 16, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The reports describe several interviews, council discussions and legislative actions without one independently inspected exact concern-event day for this item. Event date remains unknown; neither an interview nor a source-check day is substituted. The original OPMX follow-up was published October 16, 2026; its earlier water and consultation report was published June 25. The project page displays a January 14 update, but its exact first publication date is unknown.

Raised or recorded by Oklahoma Public Media Exchange.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Air and generators · Power and electric rates · Health

Communities for a Better Environment and Center for Biological Diversity filed comments disputing separate review of adjacent generator facilities and requesting analysis of cumulative air emissions, energy demand and public health for Goodman Energy Park. The groups' arguments and predictions are not agency findings, verified health effects or an Atlas decision to merge facilities.

Record status: Unknown. The individual comment outcome has not been established by this bounded original-source review. A project-page process label is not its disposition.

Event date

September 4, 2026

Source publication date

September 4, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The retained original filing or effective order provides this exact event date. The retained original CEC docket wrapper gives the publication date, distinct from the source-check date.

Raised or recorded by Communities for a Better Environment and Center for Biological Diversity.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Power and electric rates · Water use · Water quality and discharge · Noise

Scioto Post reported continued council discussion of power use, water consumption, wastewater and noise concerns about a possible data center at the former Chillicothe paper mill. The article also reported a council member describing utility staff projections; those positions are not measured impacts or an independently inspected engineering study.

Record status: Unknown. The current disposition of these reported concerns is not established by this bounded review.

Event date

October 12, 2026

Source publication date

October 13, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The original article identifies the October 12, 2026 council session in its embedded-video captions; October 13 is publication. Videos and audio were not reviewed. Scioto Post displays October 13, 2026. The separate identity/context article from The Post displays August 31. Publication days are distinct from the October 12 meeting.

Raised or recorded by Scioto Post.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Water use · Power and electric rates · Noise · Heat · Air and generators · Land use and zoning

Residents raised noise, ambient heat, water supply, power reliability and generator concerns in a separate October public filing about RB Inyokern, requesting a full environmental impact report and enforceable protections. These are attributed resident concerns and requests, not verified measurements, agency findings or confirmed effects on wells or nearby institutions. The earlier well association submission remains a separate record.

Record status: Unknown. The published resident filing requests review and protections. Current agency disposition, actual facility impacts and any operator response to this specific filing remain unverified.

Event date

October 12, 2026

Source publication date

Not established

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 23, 2026

The official docket cover records filing October 12, 2026 after submission October 11. This dates this separate resident filing, not the earliest earlier community concern or well association submission. The public docket date is established. The exact first online publication day is not separately certified.

Raised or recorded by Residents.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Noise

City of Aurora acknowledged noise complaints concerning CyrusOne in an update about scheduled electrical maintenance and daytime generator use. The city described ongoing work toward a solution. This public update does not publish individual complaint files or a count, and it does not establish an adjudicated noise violation.

Record status: Unknown. The later disposition of the city-recorded noise concerns is unknown. The company reports mitigation progress, but no independently verified complaint resolution or measured compliance outcome was established in this bounded review.

Event date

April 23, 2026

Source publication date

April 23, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The event date records the dated city update, not the unknown first complaint or a complaint filing day. The city page displays April 23, 2026. The later company statement is separately dated October 9.

Raised or recorded by City of Aurora.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Air and generators

Missouri Department of Natural Resources issued a construction air permit for emergency diesel generators, fire-pump engines and associated fuel storage at Warrenton Data Center, effective October 8, 2026, subject to nitrogen-oxide, testing, emergency-use and recordkeeping conditions. The authorization is not a violation finding or evidence of actual startup, measured emissions or delivered computing capacity.

Record status: Unknown. Permit authorization is recorded. The current outcome of the ongoing permit conditions and current compliance is not established by this bounded review; unknown does not withdraw the effective permit or decide underlying public concerns.

Event date

October 8, 2026

Source publication date

Not established

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

October 8, 2026 is the effective date printed on the signed permit face. It is not inferred to be the first public posting,actual startup or a later compliance determination. The first online publication day is unknown. Permit-face effectiveness,application dates, PDF timestamps and URL folders do not supply that publication day.

Raised or recorded by Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Land use and zoning · Power and electric rates · Other

Lexington Fayette Urban County Council recorded public concern about environmental effects, nuisances and residential energy costs in its October extension resolution. It also recorded disagreement about regulation and uncertainty about data center needs of existing healthcare, banking and telecommunications industries. These are attributed reasons for further planning and public hearings, not measured harm, agreement by every resident or a finding that concerns were resolved.

Record status: Unknown. The selected official record documents institutional concerns and a regulatory review context. Their current resolution, actual environmental or utility effects, individual project eligibility and later legal changes remain unverified. A policy pause does not establish that a concern was resolved.

Event date

October 8, 2026

Source publication date

Not established

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 23, 2026

The signed resolution and official legislative history establish October 8, 2026 passage. That dates the institutional record; the first day individual public comments were made is unknown. The exact first online publication day is not supplied in the selected official source.

Raised or recorded by Lexington Fayette Urban County Council.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Noise · Water use · Other

San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors and Community Development Department identify questions about computing development water supply, electricity, agriculture, noise, public infrastructure and emergency response in the original October 7, 2026 County account. The account reports a pause and a separate study to examine potential effects and future standards. These are attributed policy concerns rather than measured shortages, a proven agricultural loss, a facility violation or a finding about incorporated cities. Reported pause approval does not establish resolution of these concerns, complete current law or an exact legal endpoint.

Record status: Unknown. The selected institutional account records concern or a proposed legislative reason for review. Current concern resolution, measured facility effects, final current legal disposition and individual project eligibility remain unverified. A pause, draft text, extension or vote does not establish resolution of the underlying concern.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

October 7, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 24, 2026

The publication date does not independently establish the exact Board vote or first concern day. No meeting day is inferred from the publication header. The original County news account is dated October 7, 2026. This records issuer publication rather than the exact first concern, Board vote, legal commencement or expiry.

Raised or recorded by San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors and Community Development Department.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Noise · Heat · Water quality and discharge · Wildlife, wetlands and stormwater · Other

National Fisherman reported fishing, conservation and borough concerns about salmon migration, marine habitat, vessel navigation, heat, noise and public participation in the DeepGreen Cook Inlet proposal. It also reported the company's position that studies would address those questions. The underlying intervention filings and original company interview were not independently reviewed; these are reported concerns and positions, not findings of actual harm.

Record status: Unknown. The current disposition of the documented concerns is unknown in this bounded review. Reported progress, future commitments, permit notices or historical project statements do not establish actual impacts, current compliance or resolution of all concerns.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

October 7, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The original source reports historical concerns or a developing procedure without one independently verified exact concern-event day; weekday or year-only references are not converted to guessed dates. The displayed original publication day is recorded separately from the event and source check.

Raised or recorded by National Fisherman.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Water use · Power and electric rates · Noise · Heat · Land use and zoning · Air and generators · Health

Oakland City Council recorded potential electricity and water demand, generator emissions, noise, heat, vibration, infrastructure and land use compatibility concerns in Ordinance 13899. These are attributed legislative findings and reasons for a temporary approval pause within the City. Actual impacts at 415 20th Street or any other individual facility remain unverified. County aggregation does not extend City authority throughout Alameda County.

Record status: Unknown. The adopted ordinance records City concerns and a temporary approval restriction. Current resolution of the concerns, actual facility effects, later legal amendments and individual property eligibility remain unverified. Legislative adoption does not resolve the underlying concerns.

Event date

October 6, 2026

Source publication date

Not established

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 23, 2026

The attested ordinance dates Council passage October 6, 2026. This dates the legislative record rather than the first earlier resident concern. The October 13 filing stamp is separate. The exact first online publication day is not established by the clerk filing stamp or source check date.

Raised or recorded by Oakland City Council.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Land use and zoning

Michigan Public Radio Network reported a discussion near the Saline Township data center on October 2 about local control and siting on farmland. The article described resident worries about loss of agricultural land. These are reported positions, not independently verified land loss, measured effects or new legal restrictions.

Record status: Unknown. The present disposition of these reported concerns has not been independently established. Approval, construction and company statements do not establish resolution or measured effects.

Event date

October 2, 2026

Source publication date

October 2, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 19, 2026

October 2 is the date of the event identified in the report and photo caption, not merely a source-check date. The article carries this explicit first publication date. The October 19 source check is separate.

Raised or recorded by Michigan Public Radio Network.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Power and electric rates

Michigan Environmental Council, Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club raised questions about projected ratepayer benefits and proposed stronger cost protections for Google's Van Buren Township project, as summarized in the commission's October 1 order. That order also records DTE Electric's arguments for its contractual protections and conditionally approves the contracts. It does not establish actual future bill impacts.

Record status: Unknown. The commission issued a conditional contract decision, but the later disposition of these documented cost concerns is unknown. Acceptance, revised contracts, subsequent compliance and actual costs were not verified. The order expressly excludes customers who do not pay power-supply costs, including choice customers, from its prohibition on shifting such costs to other customers.

Event date

October 1, 2026

Source publication date

Not established

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

October 1, 2026 is when the order records the parties' positions. The individual underlying brief and testimony filing days have not been established in this bounded review. The original order and proof of service are dated October 1, 2026. A first public posting date is not independently established and stays unknown.

Raised or recorded by Michigan Environmental Council, Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Noise · Water use · Power and electric rates · Land use and zoning

WLRN Public Media reported residents' concerns about water, noise, electric costs and land-use compatibility at Project Tango. Its July report describes denial of an expansion, and its October follow-up explains that earlier approvals and a possible future application remain distinct. This records the outlet's account, not verified technical effects, an independently inspected county order or the resolution of every concern.

Record status: Unknown. The later disposition of the documented environmental concerns is unknown in this bounded review. The outlet-reported expansion denial is distinct from earlier approvals and possible future applications, and does not establish measured harm, safety, present compliance or resolution of each concern.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

July 16, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The initial report describes the county hearing and vote in relative terms. This item does not substitute its publication day for an independently checked exact meeting or filing day. The original report displays July 16, 2026 publication; the distinct follow-up displays October 1, 2026. These outlet dates do not establish an original county-order or company-statement publication day.

Raised or recorded by WLRN Public Media.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Air and generators · Power and electric rates

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection published a public-comment process for Monarch's proposed off-grid power facility under application R14-0042. The notice schedules October 20 and October 29, 2026 meetings, with written comments due October 30. This is a preliminary air-permit review, not an issued permit, completed hearing or measured-air finding.

Record status: Pending. West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection published a preliminary review and future comment opportunities for R14-0042. Pending applies only to that named air application; no signed final permit, current generation, project operation or resolution of earlier enforcement was verified.

Event date

April 17, 2026

Source publication date

September 29, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

The original notice expressly identifies April 17, 2026 as the air application date. October 20 and October 29 are scheduled future meetings; they have not been treated as completed events. The original agency notice displays September 29, 2026 publication. That is separate from the earlier application date, future comment deadlines and any later final permit decision.

Raised or recorded by West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item

Water quality and discharge · Wildlife, wetlands and stormwater

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection published a joint comment opportunity for Monarch State Waters applications SWP-26-0002 and SWP-26-0003, concerning proposed wetland impacts for two named campus projects. The notice schedules an October 26, 2026 meeting and comment deadline. This counts one paired public-notice process, not two verified buildings or a finding of actual environmental damage.

Record status: Pending. West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection published a comment opportunity for the paired State Waters applications through October 26, 2026. Pending applies to that process only; mitigation-credit plans do not establish final issuance, completed restoration, actual wetland effects or resolution of separate stormwater enforcement.

Event date

Not established

Source publication date

September 29, 2026

Disposition date

Not established

Concern sources checked

October 18, 2026

Exact filing dates for the two State Waters applications were not established in the read notice. October 26, 2026 is a scheduled future workshop, meeting and comment deadline, not an event already held. The original combined agency notice was published September 29, 2026. It distinguishes the State Waters process from separate air meetings and the October 30 air deadline; the publication date is not an application or issuance date.

Raised or recorded by West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection.

No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.

Report a correction · Link to this item