Senate Blocks the 417-3 Data Center Cost Bill, Then Blocks the 150 MW Alternative Too
- FERC & Federal Policy & Markets Regulatory
Marin Holt
- 0
- 7 minutes read
- House vote on H.R. 9340: 417-3
- Blocked by: Unanimous consent objection, Sen. Martin Heinrich
- H.R. 9340 large load threshold: 100 megawatts
- S. 5199 large load threshold: 150 megawatts
- Bills passed: Zero
Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) stopped the Ratepayer Protection Act on the Senate floor Thursday, one day after the House passed it 417 to 3. Senator Jon Husted (R-Ohio) asked the Senate to approve H.R. 9340 by unanimous consent, a procedure that hands any single senator a veto. Heinrich objected. He then asked the Senate to pass his own bill, the GRID Savings Act (S. 5199), and Senator Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) objected to that. Both data center cost bills died within minutes of each other, and neither got a recorded vote.
The two bills set different thresholds and different obligations. H.R. 9340 adds a standard to PURPA section 111(d) covering data centers above 100 megawatts. It requires state regulators to hold a hearing on making those customers pay the full incremental cost of the infrastructure built to serve them. It does not require any state to adopt the standard. States get two years to finish considering it.
S. 5199 goes at the same problem through FERC instead of the states. It gives FERC rulemaking jurisdiction over large load customers, defined as facilities drawing more than 150 megawatts. It then directs FERC to write a national rule for large load interconnection. It assigns interconnection costs to the customer rather than the rate base, and it requires a payment guarantee that survives the facility closing. It also lets a large load voluntarily fund backbone transmission in exchange for transmission service.
Heinrich called the House bill toothless. “Rather than voluntary pledges or suggestions to states, Congress needs to pass real legislation with real teeth,” he said. Husted described his own bill as the step that keeps families from paying for infrastructure that serves data centers. He said the 417-3 margin showed it was on track to become law. Moreno blamed Heinrich for the outcome. “The term ‘do-nothing Congress’ exists for a reason,” Moreno said. “We absolutely accomplished that right now.”
Neither senator moved off his position, and the Senate left with no federal large load cost rule of any kind. FERC issued show cause orders to grid operators in June on large load interconnection rules. That proceeding has not produced a final rulemaking, and it now remains the only active federal track.
Why It Matters
For anyone sizing a large load interconnection, the federal threshold question is still open. The two numbers on the table are 100 MW and 150 MW. A project between those two figures falls inside one bill and outside the other. Neither number binds anyone today.
Critical Perspective
The Ratepayer Protection Act passed the House 417-3 and stalled one day later on a single senator’s objection, and its 100 MW threshold never reached a Senate vote. The duty the bill creates runs to state regulators rather than to the data centers themselves, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission already opened its own large-load show cause docket in June without waiting for Congress. PURPA section 111(d) has worked this way since 1978, where Congress adds a standard and states are obliged only to commence consideration of it, which is the two-year clock written into this bill’s own text. If the states that care are already writing large-load tariffs and the rest owe nothing but a hearing, who does this standard actually bind?
Cost allocation for large loads stays where it has been. That means FERC, the show cause docket, and state commissions writing their own large load tariffs one at a time. Developers and utilities negotiating interconnection agreements this year should plan against state tariffs and FERC-jurisdictional rules, not against either bill. A 417-3 House margin turned out to predict nothing about the Senate. Unanimous consent means the next attempt needs floor time that neither chamber has scheduled.
Sources
- CBS News – Senate Democrat blocks House-passed bill on data center energy costs
- The Hill – Senate Democrat blocks House-passed bill on data center electricity costs
- U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee – GRID Savings Act introduction
- NACo – GRID Savings Act of 2026 (S. 5199) summary
- GovInfo – H.R. 9340 Ratepayer Protection Act as reported in the House
