AI Data Centers, Public Lands and Financial Disclosures

A source-based record of federal land decisions, disclosed financial interests and the legal questions under review.

Checked November 11, 2026 · The investigation continues · Original sources below

What is established—and what is not

Established: The administration directed agencies to make suitable federal lands available for qualifying data-center infrastructure; BLM approved a Nevada project; an Interior appeals board stayed that approval; officials disclosed financial interests in technology and real-estate companies; senators sought detailed records.

Not established: That federal land has been sold to any named technology company under the new strategic plan; that a particular official granted a permit to enrich themselves; that Nvidia directed BLM decisions; or that all proposed projects have received permission to build.

Key dated decisions

July 23, 2025: Executive Order 14318 instructs departments to pursue appropriately authorized data-center projects on federal lands and expedite qualifying infrastructure reviews, while referring to applicable law. Read the order.
June 2026: BLM approved Townsite Data Center on 88.5 acres near Boulder City, Nevada, through an amended solar-project right-of-way. BLM announcement.
September 1, 2026: An Interior appeals board temporarily suspended that approval after concluding challengers were likely to prevail on claims that the prior solar-project environmental review was not adequate for a data center. The stay is not a final merits judgment. Read the order (PDF).
September 8, 2026: Executive Order 14427 delegated certain energy-related Defense Production Act powers to Interior and Energy independently. It did not itself approve any specific data center. Read the delegation.
September 17–30, 2026: Utah officials approved a proposed state trust-land lease for Valar Atomics. Separately, BLM said Valar had submitted an initial application involving roughly 9,000 acres of federal land. The federal proposal still required review. KSL reporting and BLM statement.
October 29–30, 2026: Senators Wyden, Merkley and Padilla requested information on Burgum's meetings and public-land data-center projects, seeking a response by November 16. Senate correspondence.
November 6, 2026: Senator Heinrich requested BLM's full project inventory, legal authorities and environmental-review plans by November 20. ProPublica separately reported investment disclosures and agency responses. Senate request · ProPublica investigation.
November 10, 2026: Interior released its fiscal 2026–2030 strategic plan, including a proposal to consolidate the workforce and offer certain federal lands for purchase by states, localities and Tribes. The document is a plan, not a completed land sale. Official plan.

Four distinct financial and project records

Doug Burgum: ProPublica reported that analysis of his disclosed holdings placed AI-related investments at $18.1 million–$64.4 million. He left management roles at Arthur Ventures under his ethics agreement but retained financial interests. Interior rejects claims that his decisions are driven by those investments.

Steve Pearce: BLM's director disclosed technology-company investments and a stake involving Titan Development. BLM maintains he complies with applicable ethics requirements. We have not established a connection between Titan and any specific BLM data-center permit.

Michael Boren: The USDA undersecretary reported a $250,000–$500,000 Valar Atomics investment. USDA says he complies with ethics rules. No reviewed record shows he made or controlled the federal-land decision involving Valar.

Valar Atomics: Its proposed Utah project involves separate state and federal processes. The approved state trust-land lease cannot be treated as BLM authorization for the approximately 9,000-acre federal proposal.

Scope and public consequences

ProPublica reports that BLM is reviewing roughly 15 data-center proposals and 17 associated infrastructure projects across six Western states. These are applications or proposals, not a tally of completed facilities. Neither the final acreage to be authorized nor the rent or other public compensation is known for every project.

Public-policy questions include water and energy use, national-security infrastructure, Tribal consultation, public participation, the National Environmental Policy Act and how the government determines fair value when leasing public land. Supporters cite economic and energy-security benefits; critics question environmental impacts and public returns. A separate October 2026 Senate inquiry challenged an EPA proposal affecting opportunities for public comment on certain air permits.

What evidence could change the conclusion?

BLM's full project list: applicant legal entities, parcel records, status, acreage, rights-of-way, environmental analysis and lease terms.
Meeting records identifying which government officials communicated with each applicant and their actual role in a decision.
Ethics recusals, advice and disposition records for any official with a direct interest in a matter.
The agency responses requested for November 16 and 20, 2026, and any subsequent court or appeals-board rulings.

Method: This report distinguishes source documents and signed decisions from media reporting, statements by interested parties and open investigative questions. It does not allege a secret coordinated scheme or establish a violation of ethics law.

November 12: distinguish federal-land plans from private local projects

The Interior Department FY2026–2030 strategic plan describes possible federal land transfers and workforce consolidation, but authorizes no named parcel sale by itself. Separately, Cochise County, Arizona's SU26-22 application concerns a proposed 747-acre AI data-center and battery project filed by Tombstone Resources LLC. Reuters associates the proposal with SpaceX's newly reported AI-campus plans; the application is subject to local approval and is not established as a federal public-land conveyance. Compare land title, lease or ownership documents, county approval, utility agreements, actual tax treatment and federal authorizations before asserting any shared benefit.

Sources

← All reports · Encyclopedia · Evidence standards