To enact sections 9.484 and 1521.301 of the Revised Code to require data centers to report monthly and yearly water consumption and to prohibit data centers from including water consumption information in nondisclosure agreements with political subdivisions.
Summary
HB784 would create new reporting and transparency requirements for data centers that withdraw water from the state. It defines “data center” and requires such facilities to accurately measure and track water consumption under rules adopted by the chief of the Division of Water Resources. Data centers would have to file monthly reports detailing total water use, peak daily use, water sources, and whether the water was used for cooling or another purpose, plus an annual report by February 1 each year summarizing yearly water consumption and any efficiency measures taken to reduce use.
The bill also limits the use of nondisclosure agreements involving political subdivisions. It would prohibit a person acting for a data center from entering into an NDA that prevents a local government or its officials/employees from commenting on information about the data center’s water consumption and use. Any contract violating that prohibition would be void and unenforceable, and violators could face a civil fine of up to $1,000 enforceable by the attorney general.
Impact
HB784 would add two new sections to the Revised Code, creating a regulatory and reporting framework for data center water use and a separate restriction on confidentiality provisions in agreements with political subdivisions. It would affect data centers that withdraw water in any amount, the chief of the Division of Water Resources, the attorney general, and local governments that negotiate with data centers. The bill would also give the chief authority to adopt rules, collect reports, and produce an annual summary for legislative committees considering natural resources legislation.
Sentiment
Because the bill was only introduced and had no recorded votes or committee testimony in the provided materials, there is no formal vote history to gauge support or opposition. The bill’s structure suggests a policy focus on transparency, water conservation, and public accountability for large industrial users of water. The absence of recorded debate means the overall sentiment can only be characterized as an introduced proposal with an apparent regulatory and disclosure-oriented intent.
Contention
The main likely point of contention is the balance between public transparency and business confidentiality. Supporters would likely favor the bill’s reporting requirements and its ban on NDAs that keep political subdivisions from discussing water use, while opponents may argue that the reporting burden is too heavy, that the NDA restriction interferes with private contracting, or that it could discourage data center investment. Another possible issue is the breadth of the reporting mandate, including monthly reporting and detailed water-source and usage information, which may be viewed as administratively burdensome.
To amend sections 3505.01 and 3505.10 of the Revised Code to modify the deadline for a political party to certify its nominees for President and Vice-President to the Secretary of State.
To amend sections 3517.12, 3517.13, and 3517.155 of the Revised Code to modify the Campaign Finance Law regarding foreign nationals and statewide initiatives and referenda and to declare an emergency.
To amend sections 3517.12, 3517.13, and 3517.155 of the Revised Code to modify the Campaign Finance Law regarding foreign nationals and statewide initiatives and referenda and to declare an emergency.
To delay the deadline for a major political party to certify its presidential and vice presidential candidates to the Secretary of State for the 2024 general election.