Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the EPD Briefing Data Centers Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EPD briefs Georgia committee on staff, programs and data center concerns over water and air permits
Summary
EPD Director introduced leadership, reviewed EPD programs and funding, and answered legislators’ questions about employee retention, sedimentation enforcement, and data center siting — including that most data centers receive water from local utilities, closed-loop cooling uses much less water, and increased withdrawals would trigger permitting and regional planning review.
The Environmental Protection Division briefed the House Natural Resources committee on its organization, programs, funding and current priorities, and fielded lawmakers’ questions about data center water use, enforcement power on sedimentation and employee retention.
EPD’s director introduced the division’s leadership team and described the agency’s mission “to protect [and] restore Georgia’s environment,” emphasizing work on clean air, water and land and partnerships with local governments and the legislature. He reported EPD has roughly 735 full-time equivalent employees, seven district offices across the state and a laboratory in Peachtree Corners that supports analyses ranging up to PFAS in water and soils. The director said recent turnover has fallen to about 9.7% after spiking during the COVID period.
Deputy Director Anya Trishinski gave a branch-by-branch overview. She said EPD conducts air monitoring at 34 sites in 25 counties, regulates six criteria pollutants and a suite of hazardous air pollutants, and issues permits for stationary and mobile sources. On land protection, she described hazardous and solid waste programs, cleanup work supported by the Hazardous Waste Trust Fund and grants from a solid waste trust fund (both funds were cited in her briefing). On water, she said the division issues wastewater discharge and water withdrawal permits, and that regional water planning guides long-term decisions about water allocation.
On data centers, legislators pressed EPD about local impacts. Deputy Director Trishinski said most data centers get water from local utilities and therefore do not always require a direct EPD withdrawal permit; however, if a utility seeks increased withdrawal capacity to serve a data center the permit review would evaluate whether the resource could sustain the use and whether downstream users would be protected. She added that closed-loop cooling systems used by some centers can “use a lot less water” than once-through cooling, though they typically require more energy. EPD staff also said they are monitoring the growth of emergency generators at large facilities and considering permitting approaches if generator fleets could affect ambient air quality.
Lawmakers also pressed EPD on enforcement of land-disturbing activities. A legislator asked whether EPD has the authority to stop willful sedimentation from borrow pits and surface mining that harms neighboring wetlands; the director said EPD believes it has enforcement authorities but must follow administrative procedures, and he urged citizens to report sediment movement so district offices can investigate. He cited district workload numbers (about 3,200 complaints and roughly 2,500 compliance inspections last year).
On carbon sequestration and siting, EPD staff said some South Georgia locations may be suitable for future sequestration projects, but siting decisions for data centers depend on multiple factors — broadband, grid access, water and energy availability — and the agency is not yet operating an active sequestration-permitting program though it is working with EPA on potential future permitting frameworks.
The briefing concluded with committee thanks and a reminder of upcoming committee logistics.
Next step: the presentation served as an informational briefing; committee members were invited to contact EPD leadership with district-specific issues.
