Amazon says it ended NDAs for data center permits

AWS CEO Matt Garman said Amazon no longer uses NDAs with government agencies as criticism grows over secrecy, water use, power demand and pollution.

Amazon Web Services CEO Matt Garman said the company has stopped using nondisclosure agreements, or NDAs, in its dealings with government agencies as it seeks approval for new data centers. He made the remark in a blog post that also pushed back against growing suspicion around data center construction and argued that these projects can benefit local communities.

The change matters because NDAs have become part of a broader critique of how data center projects move through permitting and planning. Opponents say secrecy leaves residents in the dark until decisions are nearly final. Amazon’s move is meant to answer that complaint, but it comes amid a wider fight over water use, electricity costs, pollution and public trust.

Amazon tries to counter secrecy concerns

Garman’s post was about more than NDAs. He used it to challenge what he called several common myths about data centers, including claims that they use too much water, drive up electricity bills, create large amounts of pollution and bring little value to the communities where they are built.

Transparency remains one of the most sensitive parts of that debate. Environmental activist Erin Brockovich recently said the biggest complaint she hears about data centers is the lack of openness. She described a pattern in which projects are announced only after permits are secured, developers do not return calls, and local officials sign NDAs before nearby residents even know a project is under consideration.

Amazon’s decision to stop using NDAs with government agencies is clearly aimed at pushing back on that image. Still, as IT-PUB News notes, the company is making that case in an environment where suspicion is already high and critics are asking not just how the projects work, but who gets to know about them and when.

Water use and electricity costs stay at the center

One of Garman’s main arguments was that data centers are often blamed for water use in ways he said are misleading. Citing an Amazon report, he said “direct data center water consumption” accounts for only 0.5% of all industrial water use in the United States. He compared that share with much larger users such as golf courses and almond farming.

The broader argument does not stop there. The source notes that claims from Amazon and Nvidia appear to leave out the water used to generate electricity and manufacture chips. Scientists have also said data center water and energy use should be studied separately, because there are no federal or state requirements forcing tech companies to report this information.

Electricity is another major flashpoint. Garman said power rates have risen in some states with many data centers, but have fallen or grown more slowly in others. He argued that when rates do rise, the main reason is often an aging grid that was not expanded before demand arrived.

That explanation is disputed by at least one independent watchdog, which recently said data centers were the main driver behind a 76% year-over-year price increase on America’s largest electrical grid. The disagreement shows how difficult it is to isolate the effect of data centers from the broader strain on local infrastructure.

Permit limits and real-world emissions are both under debate

Garman also addressed criticism that data centers create significant pollution. He said opponents often focus on the maximum emissions allowed under permits rather than what actually happens in practice.

The source points to a planned Amazon data center in Texas that is permitted to release 33 million tons of carbon dioxide per year, more than any other power plant in the United States. Garman said generators at data centers “almost never run” and are idle 99.9% of the time, adding that they operate roughly 10 hours a year, mostly for required maintenance testing.

Even so, the issue remains politically and legally sensitive. The source notes that the NAACP is currently suing Elon Musk’s SpaceX/xAI over pollution-related concerns. That lawsuit sits within the same broader climate in which data centers and related AI infrastructure are drawing closer public scrutiny.

For communities, the problem is not just emissions themselves but the gap between permitted maximums and actual operating patterns. Critics focus on the official ceiling because it defines what a project is allowed to do. Companies point to real-world usage. That split continues to shape the argument.

Resistance to data centers is growing across the U.S.

Amazon’s comments also come as political resistance grows. New York recently announced a one-year moratorium on permits for large data centers. According to Garman, more than 100 data center moratoriums are currently being considered across the United States.

He warned that if such measures are adopted, the U.S. could lose ground in the race to build AI and cloud infrastructure. In his words, the country could be “writing its own losing ticket to this race,” with consequences that would last for generations.

That argument points to the business stakes behind the fight. Data centers are not just warehouses full of servers. They are core infrastructure for cloud services, AI systems and other digital tools that many companies now rely on. If local opposition slows construction, the effects could spread beyond Amazon to the wider digital economy.

At the same time, the backlash suggests technical arguments alone may not be enough. Garman said Amazon has contributed more than $1 billion to communities across the U.S. over the past three years in places where it has a meaningful data center presence. He also said the company no longer uses NDAs with the government agencies it works with on these projects.

Even that may not resolve the issue. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei recently described the AI backlash as “fundamentally a crisis of trust,” saying people assume governments and tech companies are always “cooking up some new way to screw them over.” Writer Jasmine Sun made a similar point, noting that when data center opponents hear the industry’s arguments, their response is often simple: “I don’t believe them.”

That skepticism is the harder problem for Amazon. The company is trying to show that data centers can be built more openly and with local benefits. Whether that will be enough to shift public opinion remains unsettled.