Federal rule shifts grid-upgrade costs from ratepayers to big industrial customers
H.R. 9340 — Ratepayer Protection Act · Filed by Gabe Evans (R-CO) · 34 cosponsors · Introduced Jun 18, 2026 · Reported out
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends federal utility law to require electric utilities to charge large industrial customers (those with peak demand of 100+ megawatts) the full, incremental cost of any grid upgrades needed to serve them—including costs if the customer later leaves. Utilities must also demand upfront financial assurances or contributions from these customers before building the upgrades. States have 1–2 years to adopt or confirm this standard.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is a cost-allocation rule: it shifts the burden of grid-upgrade costs from general ratepayers to the large industrial customers who trigger those upgrades. This is a regulatory standard, not a subsidy or tax provision.
What the text implies
- Large industrial customers (data centers, manufacturers, mining operations) may face significantly higher interconnection costs, potentially deterring facility siting or expansion in regulated utility territories and shifting investment to deregulated markets or other states.
- The requirement for upfront financial assurances may disadvantage smaller or newer industrial firms that lack capital reserves, concentrating grid-upgrade access among large, well-capitalized corporations.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
residential and small-business ratepayers (protected from subsidy of industrial grid upgrades); electric utilities (reduced regulatory uncertainty; clearer cost-recovery rules)