GRID Savings Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Heinrich, Martin [D-NM]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill clarifies and expands FERC's authority to regulate the connection of very large electricity consumers to the grid, aiming to streamline the process, ensure cost responsibility, and protect existing ratepayers from the financial burdens of new, significant demand.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Federal Power Act to explicitly grant the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) jurisdiction over the interconnection of "covered large loads" (new or expanded nonresidential electric loads of 150 megawatts or more) to the interstate transmission system. It mandates FERC to establish new standards and procedures for these interconnections, including rules for study processes, cost classification and allocation, payment security, and transparency, ensuring that large load customers bear the costs of their dedicated infrastructure and contribute to necessary network upgrades. The bill also allows large load customers to voluntarily fund regional transmission facilities in exchange for defined transmission service rights.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill is essential for modernizing the grid to accommodate the rapid growth of large electricity consumers, such as data centers and industrial facilities, by providing clear, standardized rules for interconnection. They contend it will protect existing ratepayers from subsidizing the infrastructure costs associated with these new, massive loads, promote grid reliability by ensuring proper planning and cost allocation for necessary upgrades, and accelerate the interconnection process by reducing uncertainty and speculative requests.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that expanding FERC's jurisdiction could lead to federal overreach into areas traditionally managed at the state or local level, potentially complicating existing regulatory frameworks. They may also contend that imposing stricter cost assignment and financial security requirements on large load customers could increase development costs, potentially slowing economic growth or discouraging investment in regions that depend on attracting such large-scale electricity consumers.
The bill is relatively short and technically focused, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(a)(3)
Definition of 'Covered Large Load'
This provision defines a 'covered large load' as a new or expanded nonresidential electric load, or a group of such loads, with an aggregate peak electric demand of at least 150 megawatts behind a single point of interconnection. This threshold is critical as it determines which electricity consumers fall under the new federal jurisdiction established by the bill, regardless of whether they are combined with generation or storage resources.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that a clear, high threshold for 'large loads' ensures that FERC's new rules target the most impactful new demands on the grid, which are often the source of significant interconnection challenges and costs, without burdening smaller projects.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that the 150 MW threshold could be arbitrary or could be gamed by developers to avoid federal oversight, or conversely, that it might be too low and capture projects that could be more efficiently regulated at the state level.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies in setting a threshold that effectively targets significant grid impacts without being overly broad or easily circumvented, balancing federal oversight with existing state regulatory roles.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(b)
Jurisdiction Over Large Load Interconnection
This section explicitly grants the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) jurisdiction over the interconnection of any covered large load to facilities used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce. It specifies that these interconnections are subject to the requirements of this new section and existing Federal Power Act sections 205 and 206, and are considered a component of open access transmission service. This includes flexible, provisional, or phased interconnection services.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(c)
Mandatory Rulemaking for Large Load Interconnection Standards
This section mandates FERC to issue a final rule within one year of the bill's enactment, establishing comprehensive standards and procedures for the interconnection of covered large loads. The rule must include pro forma provisions (standardized templates) and regionally tailored requirements, as well as criteria for determining what constitutes a covered large load. This rulemaking is the primary mechanism through which the bill's policy objectives will be implemented.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(d)(2)
Classification and Allocation of Transmission Costs
This provision establishes criteria for classifying facilities related to a covered large load as Interconnection Facilities, Direct Assignment Facilities, Network Upgrades, or Stand Alone Network Upgrades, consistent with existing FERC definitions. Crucially, it requires that 100 percent of the costs for Interconnection Facilities and Direct Assignment Facilities be directly assigned to and fully borne by the applicable covered large-load customer. Costs for Network Upgrades are allocated to large-load customers and credited back against transmission service charges, consistent with existing FERC pro forma tariffs. It also grants large-load customers the option to construct their own Network Upgrades and Interconnection Facilities.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(d)(3)
Payment and Financial Security Requirements
This section requires FERC's rule to establish specific requirements for the payment of costs allocated to a covered large-load customer and for financial security. The financial security is designed to protect other customers from unrecovered costs if a covered large load project fails to proceed or perform as planned. This ensures that if a speculative project withdraws, the costs incurred for studies or initial infrastructure development are not borne by existing ratepayers.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(e)
Voluntary Funding of Regional and Interregional Facilities
This section allows a covered large-load customer to voluntarily fund all or a portion of a transmission facility that is part of a regional or interregional transmission plan accepted by FERC. In exchange for this funding, the customer would receive a FERC-defined right to transmission service enabled by the funded facility. This funding would reduce the costs otherwise allocated to other ratepayers under existing cost allocation methods, but would not impact whether the facility is selected or how its remaining costs are allocated.
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(f)(2)
ERCOT Exemption
This section explicitly states that the entire new Section 224, which establishes FERC's jurisdiction and standards for large load interconnections, does not apply to ERCOT (the Electric Reliability Council of Texas) or any ERCOT utility. This preserves the existing regulatory framework within Texas's largely isolated electricity grid, which is generally not subject to FERC's interstate transmission jurisdiction.
The bill's extensive definitions section, particularly how it defines 'Interconnection Facility,' 'Network Upgrade,' and 'Direct Assignment Facility' by referencing existing FERC regulations (18 CFR 35.28) and pro forma tariffs, as 'adapted by the Commission for covered large loads.'
Section 2, adding FPA Section 224(a)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to leverage existing regulatory frameworks and avoid re-writing complex definitions. It ensures consistency with established FERC terminology and processes, but requires specialized knowledge to fully interpret.
Case for: Leveraging existing FERC definitions and pro forma tariffs provides a consistent and familiar framework for utilities and regulators, reducing the need to invent entirely new legal and technical concepts. This can streamline the rulemaking process and ensure compatibility with current grid operations.
Case against: The reliance on complex cross-references makes the bill less accessible to the public and requires deep expertise in FERC regulations to understand its full scope and impact, potentially obscuring subtle changes or adaptations.
Estimated impact: High, as these definitions are foundational to how costs are allocated, facilities are classified, and the entire interconnection process is structured under the new rules.