Declared, Not Measured: Volumetric Permit Triggers and Sub-Threshold Industrial Water Demand in Georgia

Georgia requires a permit of any person withdrawing more than 100,000 gallons of groundwater per day. This paper reads the Ground Water Use Act and the sixteen rules adopted under it, provision by provision, and establishes three features of that trigger from the text. It runs per person, and no rule in the Act as read combines withdrawal volumes among separately titled persons for threshold purposes. It carries no averaging qualifier for non-farm use, where Georgia's surface-water trigger is averaged monthly by statute. And every recurring duty in the rule subject to measure or report withdrawals attaches to an applicant or a permittee. Those three features produce a regime in which permit status turns on a quantity that, before a permit issues, exists only as the withdrawer's declaration. The Division holds a measured figure only for parties whose status is already settled. What remains is case-specific authority it must invoke, including compulsory metering against a permit-required person who has not applied, and a rulemaking authority for which no instrument was located in the codified rules as searched. The paper calls this a measurement-coincident threshold and states the design property independently of Georgia, as a limiting case of the reporting-threshold truncation Bennear (2008) measured. Data centers are the occasion. Sixteen applications for Development of Regional Impact review were filed with the Georgia Department of Community Affairs between January 6 and July 22, 2026, and the review asks each applicant for a water figure while its own rule makes the review advisory. One project in Irwin County declared 0.05 million gallons per day against 1,250 MW of connected load, naming an aquifer as its provider. Two water-advocacy organizations read that filing and asked the regional commission to have the Division condition a withdrawal permit and study aquifer drawdown; on a full-text search of both letters, neither asks whether a permit would be required. The paper sets the case beside two 2024 permits issued well above the line, an Irwin County ordinance that requires an estimate rather than a measurement, and Virginia's numerical drawdown criterion as a contrasting instrument type. The paper does not show that any declarant understated its demand, does not place any project above or below the trigger, and makes no claim about behavioral response to the threshold. Its corpus is state-level: Part 2 at O.C.G.A. §§ 12-5-90 through 12-5-108, Part 3 at §§ 12-5-120 through 12-5-138, the sixteen rules of Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. Subject 391-3-2 and the thirty-one rules of Department 770, the forms the agencies publish, and the Division's Lower Flint permitting materials. Rules are read as compiled through rules filed August 14, 2026; statutory text is quoted as the 2025 codification. Evidence grades appear inline, and the claim-and-source table for section 3 is appended to the paper.