The US is witnessing an unprecedented rise in electricity demand, driven by artificial intelligence (AI)-based data centres, semiconductor fabrication plants and other energy-intensive industries, which are straining the existing transmission and interconnection infrastructure. In line with the government’s broader goals to strengthen domestic manufacturing, support AI infrastructure, and ensure timely and non-discriminatory access to the transmission grid, the US Department of Energy (DOE), on October 23, 2025, directed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to begin the rulemaking process for establishing standardised interconnection procedures for large electrical loads.
In fact, the DOE secretary exercised its rarely used authority under Section 403 of the DOE Organisation Act to issue this direction. Under this section, the FERC retains full discretion over whether to adopt, modify or reject it. In response to the directive, the FERC created Docket No. RM26-4-000 on October 27, 2025, and issued a notice inviting comments, initiating public consultation on the DOE’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANOPR). This proposal would establish the first federal standards for load interconnections exceeding 20 MW, including hybrid facilities that combine load and generation at a single point of interconnection. ANOPR represents both a technical reform and a jurisdictional challenge.
Background and legal context
Historically, the FERC’s regulatory framework has focused almost exclusively on generator interconnections and open access transmission service. Key precedents include Order No. 888, 2003, 845 and 2023, which together established transparent procedures for generators to access the transmission grid and ensured non-discriminatory treatment by transmission providers. These orders, however, did not extend to load interconnections, which have typically remained under state jurisdiction.
The jurisdictional divide stems from Order No. 888 (1996), the FERC’s landmark rule that required open access to transmission systems. In that proceeding, the FERC explicitly declined to extend its authority to the transmission component of bundled retail sales, recognising that such regulation raised several difficult jurisdictional issues. The US Supreme Court upheld this limited approach in New York versus FERC, 535 U.S. 1 (2002), ruling that the FERC was not required to assert jurisdiction over retail transmissions. However, a partial dissent was issued, arguing that Congress had granted the FERC unqualified jurisdiction over all interstate transmission, and that full assertion of this authority might be necessary to prevent undue discrimination against non-utility competitors. This dissent has taken on new significance in the present context. The DOE’s 2025 directive cites it to support the argument that large-load interconnections, especially those directly connected to interstate transmission facilities, fall within the FERC’s jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. § 824).
ANOPR: Key highlights
ANOPR seeks to close the regulatory gap by extending standardised interconnection procedures to large electrical loads that directly connect to interstate transmission systems. Such loads now pose grid integration challenges similar to those of generation projects, including complex network impacts, long study queues and cost allocation disputes.
In line with the FERC’s pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Procedures and Large Generator Interconnection Agreement, the proposed reforms would only apply to new loads and hybrid facilities over 20 MW. Notably, the DOE explicitly disclaims federal authority over behind-the-meter, intra-state and small (under 20 MW) load interconnections, reaffirming that state jurisdiction over retail sales, local distribution and facility siting will remain unaffected. The DOE contends that large load interconnections are integral to maintaining open and non-discriminatory transmission access, the cornerstone of the FERC’s existing regulatory framework. ANOPR thus seeks to extend similar procedural transparency, timeliness and accountability that the FERC has already applied to generator interconnections.
ANOPR outlines 14 guiding principles. These include:
- Uniform application procedures: Large load and hybrid interconnection requests would be subject to standardised study deposits, readiness requirements and withdrawal penalties, similar to the process under Order No. 2023 for generator interconnections. This is to deter speculative projects and provide transmission providers with more useful information to more accurately forecast demand on their systems.
- Integrated studies for load and generation: The FERC would be directed to study load and generation interconnections jointly, improving siting efficiency and reducing the need for costly network upgrades.
- Evaluation of hybrid facilities: Interconnection requests would be assessed based on both injection and withdrawal rights, encouraging the co-location of data centres, storage and generation to maximise transmission utilisation.
- Expedited review for flexible loads: Facilities that agree to be curtailable or despatchable, such as demand-response capable data centres, could qualify for accelerated study timelines, potentially within 60 days.
- Cost responsibility: Large-load customers would be fully responsible for network upgrade costs assigned through the study process, with limited crediting mechanisms to offset costs where appropriate. This mirrors the existing “cost-causer-pays” principle applied to generators.
- Compliance and reliability standards for large load interconnections: Utilities serving large loads must meet all applicable North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) reliability standards and Open Access Transmission Tariff provisions. NERC should review whether new registration categories or revised reliability standards are necessary to maintain bulk electric system reliability.
- These provisions are intended to create a transparent and predictable interconnection process that provides large load developers with clearer timelines and obligations.
- ANOPR seeks inputs from stakeholders, including utilities, data centre operators, transmission developers, state commissions and consumer advocates, on several contentious issues listed here.
- The 20 MW applicability threshold, and whether it should be raised or lowered.
- The treatment of hybrid facilities combining load and generation.
- The allocation of network upgrade costs and potential crediting mechanisms.
- How the rule should apply to projects already in existing interconnection queues.
The next steps
On November 7, 2025, the FERC extended the date for submitting initial comments on ANOPR to November 21, 2025 (from November 14), with reply comments due on December 5, 2025 (November 28, 2025 previously). This extension was in response to a request for time extension by the Organization of MISO States and supported by the New England States Committee on Electricity, PJM Interconnection and the Organization of PJM States. The DOE’s directive requests that the FERC take final action by April 30, 2026, though it is not legally bound by this deadline.
On November 11, 2025, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners passed a resolution urging the FERC to resist the DOE’s push to give itself jurisdiction over large loads interconnecting with the grid — an authority historically belonging to state regulators. Following this, NARUC submitted its initial comments on ANOPR, reasserting states’ jurisdiction over end-user load interconnections. This was among about 150 initial comments filed with FERC. Grid operators PJM and Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) commented that FERC should issue near-term regulatory guidance on matters directly within its wholesale and transmission jurisdiction rather than standardised large load interconnection procedures. In contrast, the Data Center Coalition expressed support for a standardised process, with stipulations.
Conclusion
ANOPR is a turning point in the US transmission policy, with the DOE effectively testing the boundaries of federal jurisdiction over interstate transmission. Critics argue that it could lead to increased litigation over the scope of FERC’s authority, particularly if the final rule indirectly affects retail tariffs or local infrastructure, areas traditionally reserved for state utility commissions. Proponents, however, argue that uniform federal rules are essential to managing large, interstate-scale loads, as inconsistent state processes have led to prolonged delays and discriminatory treatment.
If adopted, the forthcoming rule could provide greater clarity and predictability for major industrial and digital infrastructure developers while helping modernise the grid to accommodate rapidly growing electricity demand. However, it also risks reigniting federal-state tensions over regulatory authority, a debate that has shaped the US electricity law for nearly a century.
