Data Center Resource Disclosure Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill establishes a voluntary data collection and public disclosure mechanism for data center resource consumption, aiming to increase transparency and inform future policy.
What it actually does
This bill directs the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to conduct an annual, voluntary survey of data centers in the United States, requesting information on their energy and water consumption. It mandates the publication of these results, including an interactive map and identification of data centers that did not provide complete information, and requires a report to Congress with recommendations for improving data center regulation and transparency.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill is a crucial first step towards understanding and addressing the environmental impact of data centers, which are significant consumers of energy and water. They contend that a voluntary survey fosters cooperation while providing essential data, and public disclosure promotes accountability and empowers stakeholders to advocate for more sustainable practices.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that a voluntary survey may not yield comprehensive or representative data, as less efficient data centers might opt out, thus limiting its utility for effective policy-making. Some industry stakeholders may also express concerns about being publicly identified for non-participation, viewing it as undue pressure despite the voluntary nature of the survey.
The bill is very short and straightforward, allowing for quick comprehension by any interested reader.
Section 2(a)
Data Center Resource Consumption Survey
This provision directs the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to annually conduct a voluntary survey for all U.S. data centers. The survey will request information on their energy and water consumption over the preceding year. It also ensures that individuals and entities, including public utility boards, labor organizations, and consumer groups, have an opportunity to submit comments related to the survey.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that this voluntary survey is a practical and non-burdensome way to begin collecting vital data on data center resource usage, which is essential for understanding their environmental footprint. The inclusion of public comment opportunities ensures a wide range of perspectives can inform the process.
Critics contend
Opponents might contend that a voluntary survey is inherently limited and may not provide a complete or accurate picture of resource consumption across the entire data center industry, potentially hindering effective policy development. Some data centers might be reluctant to share information, even voluntarily.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the need for data collection to inform policy with concerns about imposing regulatory burdens on the industry, opting for a voluntary approach that may sacrifice comprehensiveness for cooperation.
Section 2(b)
Publication of Survey Results and Congressional Report
This section requires the Assistant Secretary to publish the survey results on the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) website within 180 days of conducting the survey. The publication must include an interactive map of the United States displaying results, identify data centers that did not provide complete information, and summarize public comments received. Additionally, the Assistant Secretary must submit a report to Congress with recommendations to improve data center regulation, specifically focusing on transparency.
The bill defines 'data center' by referencing an existing statute, section 453(a) of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17112(a)).
Section 2(d)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative drafting practice to ensure consistency with existing federal definitions and avoid ambiguity or creating conflicting definitions across different laws.
Case for: Proponents argue that referencing an established definition ensures legal consistency and clarity, avoiding the need to redefine a complex term and preventing potential conflicts with existing regulations or programs.
Case against: Critics might suggest that relying on external definitions makes the bill less self-contained and harder for a casual reader to fully comprehend without additional research, potentially obscuring the exact scope of the bill's applicability.
Estimated impact: This definition determines the exact universe of data centers that will be subject to the voluntary survey and subsequent public disclosure, thereby setting the boundaries for the bill's practical implementation.