Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The No Harm Data Centers Act gives the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) exclusive authority to approve retail electricity rates and charges from covered utilities to large data centers (those >50 MW), requires those rates to fully allocate transmission, distribution, and generation upgrade costs to data centers, and prohibits cost-shifting of those costs to other retail customers.
It exempts certain utilities (cooperatives, municipals, TVA, and federal PMAs), raises civil penalties up to $10 million per day for violations of the new section, stops judicial enforcement of predispute nondisclosure clauses against public officials regarding data center construction, and directs EPA to contract the National Academies for a 180-day assessment of environmental and public health impacts of data centers with mitigation recommendations.
Substantial change in retail-rate authority for a specific industry, strong likely opposition from utilities/states and probable litigation reduce chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly articulates a policy goal and makes substantial statutory changes to allocate costs and federalize rate approval for large data centers, while also adding penalty provisions and a mandated study. It integrates with the Federal Power Act through specific amendments and definitions.
Federal preemption of retail rate authority prompts major disagreement
Federal preemption of retail rate authority prompts major disagreement
Generally favorable because the bill protects residential and small customers from bearing data center infrastructure costs and requires an environmental and public health assessment.
The nondisclosure limitation increases local governmental transparency around data center deals.
Some uncertainty remains about exemptions and whether the bill goes far enough on environmental protections.
Cautious support: the bill addresses a clear problem of cost-shifting and system reliability, but raises jurisdictional and implementation questions.
The central concern is ensuring the policy is administrable, legally sound, and avoids unintended electricity market disruptions.
Likely opposed because the bill expands federal authority into retail electricity pricing, imposes heavy cost and regulatory burdens on data centers, and risks deterring investment.
The nondisclosure restriction and steep penalties are seen as government overreach into private contracts and business operations.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantial change in retail-rate authority for a specific industry, strong likely opposition from utilities/states and probable litigation reduce chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Federal preemption of retail rate authority prompts major disagreement
Substantial change in retail-rate authority for a specific industry, strong likely opposition from utilities/states and probable litigation…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly articulates a policy goal and makes substantial statutory changes to allocate costs and federalize rate approval for large data centers, while also adding pen…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.