DOE Directs FERC to Address Large Load Interconnection Procedures

The ANOPR proposes a set of general principles for FERC to consider in a rulemaking procedure, but left FERC to contend with the details and intricacies of this critical and timely issue. The current load interconnection procedures pose challenges for large loads to interconnect with the transmission system. This is particularly acute with respect to data centers because of their load size and the speed with which these assets seek connection to the grid to receive power supply.

The ANOPR encourages FERC to assert jurisdiction and implement standardized interconnection procedures that provide for open, non-discriminatory access for large loads seeking to directly access the transmission system, including hybrid loads that share a point of interconnection with new or existing generation facilities. Secretary Wright’s letter with the ANOPR requests that FERC take final action no later than April 30, 2026.

FERC’s Large Load Runway

Over the past year, FERC has grappled with how best to address issues related to the increasing number of large loads seeking to connect with the transmission system and large “behind the meter” co-located loads, but it has yet to provide comprehensive guidance for large load customers, generators, and transmissions owners. FERC has considered large load issues in a series of different proceedings, including:

• On November 1, 2024, FERC held a technical conference addressing co-located large load issues with representatives from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (“NERC”), electric grid operators, and data center and energy policy representatives.²
• To date FERC is still considering a complaint alleging that the PJM Interconnection L.L.C. (“PJM”) Open Access Transmission Tariff (“OATT”) “is unjust and unreasonable and unduly discriminatory because it does not contain rules for interconnected generators to follow when seeking to provide service to Fully Isolated Co-Located Load.”³
• FERC instituted a show cause proceeding pursuant to Section 206 of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”) after determining that the PJM OATT appeared unjust and unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential because it failed to include provisions addressing the rates, terms, and conditions of service that apply to co-location agreements with sufficient clarity.⁴
• FERC has considered large load issues in the context of various individual filings by transmission providers under Section 205 of the FPA.⁵

While FERC has taken steps to develop the record and address the issues surrounding the increased prevalence of large loads to power data centers and AI operations, the issues remain unresolved.

The ANOPR Raises Jurisdictional Issues

Historically, FERC has not exerted jurisdiction over load interconnections. Both the ANOPR and prior FERC proceedings explore the jurisdictional line that FERC must maneuver around to assert jurisdiction over large loads seeking to interconnect with the transmission system. One major jurisdictional question is whether the interconnection of large loads falls under FERC’s jurisdiction or retail sales of electricity regulated by the states.

FERC has readily acknowledged its statutory responsibility to “ensure that the rates, charges, and classifications for such wholesale sale and transmission of electricity, as well as the practices directly affecting such sale and transmission of electricity, are just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential.”⁶ The threshold jurisdictional issue will be whether FERC claims jurisdiction over large load transmission interconnection.

The ANOPR relies on four jurisdictional arguments to argue that FERC has jurisdiction over the interconnection of large loads to the transmission system, including those seeking to share a point of interconnection with new or existing generation facilities. The ANOPR argues that:

1. Large load interconnections are a “critical component of open access transmission service,” like electric generator interconnections standardized in Order No. 2003, that require minimum terms and conditions to ensure non-discriminatory transmission service.
2. Large load interconnections directly affect wholesale electricity rates, and Section 201 of the FPA has vested exclusive authority in FERC to ensure wholesale rates are just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential.
3. The ANOPR does not impact state authority over retail electric rates because the proposal does not exert jurisdiction over any retail sales to the large load. Nothing in the ANOPR affects the expansion or modification of generation facilities, which is reserved to the states consistent with Section 201(b)(1) of the FPA.
4. FERC’s jurisdiction over large load interconnections is consistent with the FPA’s core purpose that FERC shall have exclusive jurisdiction over the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce.

To support the assertion that the interconnection of large loads falls within FERC’s jurisdiction, the ANOPR relies on FERC’s unbundling requirement in Order No. 888, the Supreme Court of the United States’ subsequent affirmation of Order No. 888 in New York v. FERC, and FERC’s imposition of standard generator interconnection procedures for transmission providers in Order Nos. 2003, 845, and 2023. The ANOPR draws parallels to the way FERC claimed jurisdiction over standardized generator interconnection procedures in Order Nos. 845 and 2023 to support an argument that FERC has jurisdiction over large load interconnection and related transmission interconnection reforms.

Proposed Reforms to Large Load Interconnections

The ANOPR proposes a set of 14 principles that should inform FERC’s rulemaking to address reforms to the interconnection process.

1. FERC’s jurisdiction should be limited to interconnections directly to transmission facilities, consistent with FERC’s seven-factor test for determining the primary function of a facility, to avoid affecting states’ jurisdiction.⁷
2. Reforms will only apply to new and hybrid loads greater than 20 MW.
3. Load and hybrid facilities should be studied together with generation facilities to reduce costly network upgrades if a large load is sited near or at the same point of interconnection as a generation facility.
4. To deter speculative projects and increase certainty in transmission forecasting, load and hybrid facilities should be subject to standardized study deposits, readiness requirements, and withdrawal penalties, like generating facilities. The ANOPR seeks comments on these requirements and whether additional commitments or financial penalties would be appropriate.
5. Hybrid facilities should be studied based on requested injection and/or withdrawal rights to incentivize co-location with new generation and ensure efficient buildout of the transmission system.
6. Hybrid facilities shall be required to install system protection facilities necessary to prevent unauthorized injections or withdrawals. The ANOPR seeks comments on the minimum technical requirements for such system protection facilities and whether other operational limitations should be considered.
7. FERC should expedite interconnection study of large loads that agree to be curtailable and hybrid facilities that agree to be curtailable and dispatchable. The ANOPR seeks comment on how to conduct and the deadline for this expedited study process.
8. Load and hybrid facilities should be responsible for 100% of the network upgrades that are assigned through interconnection studies. The ANOPR seeks comment on whether these costs should be offset through a crediting mechanism and the related time period.
9. If an interconnection customer is not a transmission owner, the interconnection customer should be afforded equivalent rights to build transmission as provided to generator interconnection customers.
10. An existing generating facility that seeks a partial suspension of interconnection rights to serve a new load at the same location must go through a system support resource/reliability- must-run type study which considers forecasted load growth on a three-year forward-looking basis and the network upgrades required to ensure reliability to the power system. Such a study has the potential to prevent proposed generation interconnection right suspensions, given the anticipated demand growth. ANOPR seeks comment on whether and how resource adequacy should be considered in such study.
11. Utilities serving large loads should be responsible for transmission service based on their withdrawal rights, to accurately reflect the quantity of capacity and energy being transmitted across the system to the load.
12. Utilities serving large loads should be responsible for ancillary services based on peak demand, without consideration of co-located generation.
13. There must be a transition plan to implement any reforms. The ANOPR seeks comment on the appropriate transitions plans to implement these reforms, including for pending large load interconnection studies.
14. Utilities serving large loads must meet all applicable NERC reliability standards and OATT provisions.

Immediate Next Steps

FERC issued a Notice Inviting Comments regarding the ANOPR.⁸ The deadline to submit comments is November 14, 2025 and reply comments are due by November 28, 2025. Interested parties should look to comment on the ANOPR as a whole and specifically principles of reform 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 13 in the list above.

V&E Experience

Our team has extensive experience advising clients on pressing issues related to the FPA and transmission interconnection, and navigating the notice and comment period during Commission rulemaking proceedings. We are available to provide more in-depth analysis of this proceeding. If you are interested, please contact the Vinson & Elkins attorney with whom you usually work or the attorneys below.

¹ Secretary of Energy’s Direction that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Initiate Rulemaking Procedures and Proposal Regarding the Interconnection of Large Loads Pursuant to the Secretary’s Authority Under Section 403 of the Department of Energy Organization Act, Dep’t of Energy (Oct. 23, 2025), https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-10/403%20Large%20Loads%20Letter.pdf (“Directive”).

² Final transcript for the November 1, 2024 Commissioner Led Technical Conference Regarding Large Loads Co-Located at Generating Facilities, Docket No. AD24-11-000 (Dec. 3, 2024).

³ Complaint Requesting Fast Track Processing of Constellation Energy Generation, LLC, Docket No. EL25-20-000, at 1 (Nov. 22, 2024).

⁴ PJM Interconnection, LLC, 190 FERC ¶ 61,115 at P 74 (2025) (“PJM Show Cause Proceeding Order”).

⁵ See, e.g., Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc., 193 FERC ¶ 61,070 (2025) (rejecting filing on the basis that certain aspects of the proposal appear to present an impermissible intrusion on retail rate regulation and thus are not subject to FERC’s authority pursuant to section 205 of the FPA).

⁶ PJM Show Cause Proceeding Order at P 66 (citing 16 U.S.C. §§ 824d, 824e).  

⁷ See Cal. Pac. Elec. Co., 133 FERC ¶ 61,018 at PP 22-29, 45 (2010).

⁸ Interconnection of Large Loads to the Interstate Transmission System, Docket No. RM26-4-000, Notice Inviting Comments (Oct. 27, 2025).