- Senators have voted 73-25 to clear a procedural hurdle for the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act. The bill still faces votes in the Senate and action in the House.
- The package would revise federal permitting and strengthen federal authority over some interstate transmission lines, while changing how grid costs are allocated to large computing users.
- For UK investors in US power, the transmission provisions could change which projects can reach customers, while the data centre rules could change the cost of bringing new demand onto the system.
The US Senate has voted to advance a bipartisan energy permitting package that would speed some federal reviews and change how the country plans and pays for electricity infrastructure as data centre demand grows.
The 73-25 vote cleared the threshold to end debate on the motion to proceed to H.R. 2347, the legislative vehicle for the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act.
The margin showed that the bill’s backers could bring together senators with different priorities, including faster approvals for energy projects and stronger protections against shifting the cost of serving data centres to existing customers.
The Senate was due to resume consideration on Tuesday, with amendments and a final vote still ahead. The House would have to agree to the same text before it could go to the president.
Easing congestion
A Congressional Research Service analysis of the revised text says the bill would change when the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission can issue a construction permit for certain transmission lines. That federal authority sits alongside state siting powers.
The legislation would also address how the costs of qualifying lines are shared, with benefits such as reduced congestion and improved reliability relevant to the calculation.
Those provisions could make a difference to projects that depend on moving electricity across state or regional boundaries. A wind or solar farm can have a viable site and a willing buyer but still face years of uncertainty over the network needed to connect them.
Shorter reviews can help with one part of that problem, while clarity about which customers benefit and who pays can make the line itself easier to finance.
The wider bill would also constrain the timetable for some legal challenges and change aspects of environmental review. Some environmental and tribal groups remain opposed, while the sponsors say revisions strengthen early consultation with tribes on projects affecting important cultural sites.
How those provisions emerge from the amendment process will affect both the bill’s chances of passing and the way it works in practice.
Data centre costs
Senator Martin Heinrich, one of the sponsors, said the bill should make sure “that data centers pay their fair share”. The package would direct federal regulators to revise how transmission costs are charged to certain computing customers and preserve scope for states to set policies on their electricity rates.
That could alter the economics of a site if connecting it requires more network investment than competing locations.
Britain is grappling with a related question through its Data Centre Covenant, which calls for more flexible connections and better alignment between new sites and available capacity. The US proposal puts greater emphasis on allocating the incremental cost to the user.
For British investors and developers active in both markets, the practical issue is how much of a project’s network cost can be established before signing a power contract or committing to a site.
