Case File

Amazon $20.5M Morrow County Nitrate Settlement

Name: Data Center Entitlement Risk Index Q1 2026
Creator: RealClear
Published: 2026-03-29

Morrow County, OR

Pearson v. Port of Morrow in U.S. District Court. At least 634 domestic wells in the Lower Umatilla Basin above federal nitrate limits; some nearly 10x. Named plaintiffs: Michael Pearson, Michael and Virginia Brandt, James and Silvia Suter. Lead counsel Steve Berman. On March 31, 2026, Amazon agreed to pay $20.5M to settle — without admitting liability. Sixteen defendants remain, including Lamb Weston, Madison Ranches, and Threemile Canyon Farms.

Kill · 36/100Settled

Case File · Morrow & Umatilla Counties, Oregon

Amazon denied it. Amazon settled for $20.5 million.

Pearson v. Port of Morrow, filed in U.S. District Court on behalf of residents above at least 634 domestic wells testing above federal nitrate limits. Amazon settled March 31, 2026 without admitting liability. Sixteen defendants remain. The Lower Umatilla Basin is the sole water source for approximately 45,000 residents.

Cited post-settlement corridor read: 36/100 — operational, but now legally and politically expensive to expand.

See the full cited brief

$20.5M

Settlement

634+

Wells Affected

Remaining Defendants

~45,000

Basin Residents

13+

Amazon DCs

36/100

RealClear Score

Morrow & Umatilla Counties, OR · 1990s — 2026

From basin contamination to class-action settlement.

Thirty years of state acknowledgment, then a data-center boom, then the lawsuit.

Pre-Filing
Regulatory Process
Community Opposition
Current Status

1990s — 2011
State first acknowledges Lower Umatilla Basin contamination
Oregon state agencies acknowledge the need for Lower Umatilla Basin cleanup more than 30 years prior to 2026, per reporting by OPB and The Fern. The contamination predates data-center construction and reflects a mix of agricultural and industrial contributors.
Rolling Stone — Amazon to Pay $20.5 Million in Settlement of Class Action Suit Over Pollution in Eastern Oregonapprox.
2011
Amazon opens first Morrow County data center
Amazon Web Services opens its first Morrow County data center in Boardman, drawn by cheap hydropower, Columbia River proximity, and available industrial land. The Lower Umatilla Basin aquifer supplies the region.
Rolling Stone — Amazon to Pay $20.5 Million in Settlement of Class Action Suit Over Pollution in Eastern Oregon
2017+
Amazon expands into Umatilla County (Hermiston)
Amazon expands data-center capacity into Hermiston in Umatilla County. Over the next several years, the company operates 13 facilities in and around the Lower Umatilla Basin per OPB reporting.
approx.
2024
Oregon Health Authority identifies nitrate crisis
The Oregon Health Authority formally identifies the nitrate contamination crisis in Morrow County. At least 634 domestic wells test above federal safety limits, with some wells measuring nearly ten times the federal nitrate limit.
approx.
2024 — 2025
Pearson v. Port of Morrow filed
Michael Pearson, Michael and Virginia Brandt, and James and Silvia Suter file a class-action complaint in U.S. District Court, represented by Steve Berman. The complaint names the Port of Morrow, Amazon, and additional industrial and agricultural defendants. It seeks class-action status for tens of thousands of residents.
The Portland Tribune — Amazon to Pay $20.5 Million Settlement Over Northeast Oregon Nitrate Pollutionapprox.
2025
Hermiston annexes 800 acres for more data centers
The Hermiston City Council votes in 2025 to annex 800 acres of land specifically to attract additional data-center investment. The annexation proceeds despite the known contamination posture and pending litigation against existing operators.
Hermiston Herald — Hermiston Takes Steps to Accommodate Massive Data Centers

March 31, 2026

Amazon settles for $20.5 million

Amazon announces a $20.5 million settlement with plaintiffs. The settlement funds construction of private wells and public water-treatment projects. Amazon denies contributing to the contamination and says it settled to “focus our time and resources on supporting the community rather than on litigation.”

April 2026 — Ongoing

16 defendants remain in active litigation

The Amazon settlement leaves 16 other defendants in active litigation, including Lamb Weston, Madison Ranches, and Threemile Canyon Farms. Attorney Steve Berman stated: “We appreciate Amazon taking the first step toward solving the nitrate pollution problem, but the work is far from over.”

The Parties Who Shaped This Settlement

Plaintiffs, defendants, state regulators.

Amazon’s settlement is a plaintiff-firm template for every comparable data-center corridor.

Amazon Web Services

Defendant — 13+ Morrow/Umatilla data centers

Mixed

Documented Record

Agreed March 31, 2026 to a $20.5 million settlement in Pearson v. Port of Morrow. Denies any contribution to nitrate contamination; stated it settled to “focus our time and resources on supporting the community rather than on litigation.”

A settle-and-deny posture preserves Amazon’s ability to operate existing capacity but creates a financial precedent that plaintiff-firm economics will extend to additional jurisdictions with similar cooling-water-return patterns.

Steve Berman

Lead Plaintiff Attorney (Hagens Berman)

Opposed

Documented Record

Represents plaintiffs in Pearson v. Port of Morrow. Stated on the settlement announcement: “We appreciate Amazon taking the first step toward solving the nitrate pollution problem, but the work is far from over.”

The ‘first step’ framing signals continued litigation against remaining defendants. Berman’s firm has a documented track record of class-action environmental litigation and will likely extend the theory to comparable data-center corridors.

Michael Pearson

Lead Plaintiff

Opposed

Documented Record

Named lead plaintiff in Pearson v. Port of Morrow alongside Michael and Virginia Brandt and James and Silvia Suter. The class seeks recovery for tens of thousands of residents in Morrow and Umatilla counties.

The four-household named plaintiff group is a typical class-certification pattern. Their willingness to sit for multi-year litigation while relying on bottled water is a strong credibility signal for further class certification.

Oregon Health Authority

State regulator

Opposed

Documented Record

Formally identified the nitrate contamination crisis in 2024. State agencies had acknowledged the area needed cleanup over 30 years prior, per OPB and Food and Environment Reporting Network coverage.

A state public-health identification is the procedural trigger for both private litigation and tighter Oregon DEQ oversight of industrial water discharge. It is the leading indicator The cited review surfaces for any new applicant post-2024.

Hermiston City Council

City of Hermiston, Umatilla County

Supported

Documented Record

Voted in 2025 to annex 800 acres specifically to attract additional data-center investment, per OPB reporting.

The 800-acre annexation during a known contamination crisis signals continued municipal-level economic-development priority despite regional litigation risk. That divergence between city and state posture is the policy seam plaintiff firms exploit.

Lamb Weston / Madison Ranches / Threemile Canyon Farms

Co-defendants

Mixed

Documented Record

Remain named defendants in Pearson v. Port of Morrow following Amazon’s March 31, 2026 settlement. Each has independent agricultural operations in the basin.

Their continued litigation posture means discovery and trial proceedings will continue to produce public-record disclosures about basin contamination contributors — each disclosure is a political asset for opposition to new data-center or agricultural industrial capacity.

The Key Differentiator

Source records that existed before Pearson was filed.

Regional Aquifer, Not Municipal Supply

The Lower Umatilla Basin is the sole water source for approximately 45,000 residents. When data-center cooling water returns to a regional aquifer, any nitrate signal gets attributed across every industrial user. Closed-loop cooling is not optional in this class of basin.

30-Year State Acknowledgment Record

Oregon state agencies acknowledged basin contamination more than 30 years before the 2024 OHA identification. A 30-year documented record of state-acknowledged problem is a pre-built plaintiff exhibit list.

Class Certification Favorable Facts

634+ wells above federal limit in a defined geography with commonality of water source is a textbook pattern for class certification. The four-household named-plaintiff structure is Berman’s proven template.

Settle-and-Deny Has Financial Precedent

Amazon’s $20.5M settlement without admission of liability creates a ceiling and a template. Plaintiff firms can now model expected recoveries in comparable Oregon, Washington, and Arizona basins.

City-State Posture Divergence

Hermiston’s 2025 annexation of 800 acres for more data centers during an active OHA-identified crisis is the exact divergence between municipal economic-development priority and state public-health posture that plaintiff firms monitor.

Sixteen-Defendant Trial Ahead

With 16 defendants remaining post-Amazon, discovery and depositions will produce years of public-record disclosures about basin contamination contributors. Each disclosure becomes a political input to every future data-center hearing in the basin.

The Pre-Filing Research

What RealClear finds at the Port of Morrow corridor.

Before Pearson was filed. Before the settlement. Before the 800-acre Hermiston annexation.

realclear.ai/analysis/port-of-morrow-umatilla-basin-or

Corridor AnalysisPort of Morrow / Lower Umatilla Basin Morrow & Umatilla Counties, OR — 13+ Amazon data centers, regional aquifer

Post-settlement litigation risk

Feasibility Score36/100

Material Constraints

634+ domestic wells documented above federal nitrate limits

Amazon $20.5M settlement creates public-record allegation pattern

16 remaining defendants — Lamb Weston, Madison Ranches, Threemile Canyon Farms

Oregon Health Authority identified contamination in 2024, acknowledged 30+ years prior

Lower Umatilla Basin is sole water source for approximately 45,000 residents

RecommendationELEVATED LEGAL RISK. The Pearson settlement does not admit Amazon liability but establishes a plaintiff playbook. Future data-center applications in Morrow or Umatilla must assume a litigation overlay: discovery-driven disclosure of cooling-water disposal pathways, plaintiff-firm monitoring, and Oregon DEQ posture hardened by the 2024 identification. Closed-loop, zero-evaporation cooling is now the political floor, not the differentiator.

Pearson v. Port of Morrow (U.S. District Court) · Settlement Mar 31, 2026 · OHA 2024 Identification

Primary Source Documents

4 Documents

Every finding cited to the source. Click any document to preview it directly. Source-record patterns visible to experienced entitlement analysts months before the hearing.

Community Record · Source ReviewLinked source documents — sourced case file

Community risk review — documented public record

Every source below is a clickable primary document or news article from RealClear's case-research file. The production source-review workflow uses the same cited-record standard as brief evidence.

Historical record: Insufficient recordSource support: limited·4 linked source documents·1 source outlets

Record questions still open: No organized community coalition was surfaced in the case record. That absence is itself a data point — the engine returns what the record contains.

How this was assembled: Every source record ties to a public source you can verify yourself — news coverage, hearing records, court filings, public testimony. No scraped gated platforms, no invented engagement numbers, no attributions that aren’t on the page. RealClear surfaces source records; your team decides. See our methodology for the full sourcing standard.

This Is Entitlement Research

Request a site memo for your next project.

RealClear maps aquifer-scale litigation risk, state-regulator posture, and the city-state divergence patterns plaintiff firms exploit.

Request a site memo All Case Files

Cited research summary · Not legal advice · Verify independently before making investment decisions