When a large data center connects to the electric grid, it does not simply plug in. It triggers a regulated legal process that unfolds over months or years inside a state public utility commission or a federal agency. When a utility seeks to raise residential rates to pay for infrastructure driven by data center demand, that process is also regulated — and nominally public. When a utility files a long-term resource plan that projects billions in new generation and transmission spending to serve data centers, that plan goes through a public review.
Most residents living near data centers, or paying higher electricity bills because of them, have never heard of any of this. The proceedings happen in administrative hearing rooms, not city council chambers. The participants are utilities, their attorneys, large industrial customers, and the occasional consumer advocate. Neighbors who might have the most to say about what is being decided are almost never in the room.
That absence is not legally required. It is a function of unfamiliarity and inaccessibility. Understanding how these proceedings work — and what levers they provide — is a practical first step toward changing that.
What a Public Utility Commission Does
Every state has a public utility commission, sometimes called a public service commission or, in Virginia’s case, the State Corporation Commission. These agencies regulate electric utilities — the companies that generate, transmit, and distribute electricity to homes and businesses. That regulation covers the rates utilities can charge, the infrastructure they can build and recover costs for, the long-term resource plans they must file, and the terms under which new customers connect to the grid.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) operates at the federal level and regulates interstate electricity transmission and wholesale power markets, including the interconnection process for large customers connecting to the transmission grid. Regional transmission organizations like PJM Interconnection — which manages the grid across thirteen states and the District of Columbia — operate under FERC jurisdiction.
State PUCs regulate distribution utilities: the companies that deliver electricity from the transmission system to homes and businesses. They set retail rates, approve infrastructure investments, and review utility resource plans. Their decisions directly determine what residential customers pay for electricity and what infrastructure is built in which communities.
Both levels of the regulatory system are administrative agencies. They conduct proceedings that have some features of a court process — formal dockets, filed documents, legal standards of review — but are open to public participation in ways that civil litigation often is not. Understanding which proceeding addresses which concern is the first step toward meaningful participation.
Interconnection Proceedings: When a Data Center Asks to Connect
Before a large data center can draw power from the grid, it must apply for interconnection service. In most of the country, this process runs through a regional transmission organization like PJM and is governed by FERC-approved tariffs. The interconnection study process is designed to determine what, if any, upgrades to transmission infrastructure are required to accommodate the new load — and who pays for them.
These proceedings are public in a formal sense. Interconnection queue data, study reports, and proposed agreements are filed as public documents. FERC dockets are searchable at elibrary.ferc.gov{target=”_blank”}. PJM’s interconnection queue is available at pjm.com{target=”_blank”}.
In practice, the interconnection process has historically been opaque to nonspecialists. Tariff provisions are technical. Cost allocation decisions — determining who pays for transmission upgrades needed because of a new large load — are embedded in engineering studies that few outside the industry read. The question of whether a data center’s interconnection costs are being spread across all ratepayers rather than borne by the data center itself is determined in this process.
FERC ordered PJM in late 2025 to revise its tariff to better address how data centers with co-located generation connect to the grid, and directed PJM to develop an Expedited Interconnection Track for large loads. The stated goal includes safeguards to prevent cost-shifting to other ratepayers — but that outcome depends on how tariff provisions are interpreted and enforced over time. Consumer advocates who intervene in FERC proceedings have the standing to contest cost allocation decisions.
At the state level, interconnection of facilities connecting to the distribution system goes through the state utility. Some state PUCs have begun to scrutinize these requests more carefully as data center load has grown. The Pennsylvania PUC voted unanimously in March 2025 to open a proceeding examining the grid impacts of large-load customers, and by November 2025 had advanced a model tariff proposal that would require data centers to bear a larger share of infrastructure costs. The PUC’s tentative order opened a thirty-day public comment period — a direct opportunity for residential ratepayers to put their concerns on the record.
Rate Cases: When Utilities Seek Cost Recovery
A rate case is the proceeding in which a regulated utility asks its state PUC for permission to raise rates. Utilities file rate cases when their costs — including capital investments in new generation and transmission infrastructure — exceed what they currently recover from customers.
The connection to data center growth is direct and significant. In Virginia, Dominion Energy’s integrated resource plan has projected that data center load growth will drive major new infrastructure spending. The Piedmont Environmental Council submitted testimony in a Dominion rate case and organized more than two thousand Virginia residents and businesses to participate, arguing that residential customers should not bear the cost of infrastructure built to serve data centers. Dominion’s own projections estimated that a residential customer paying $142 per month in 2025 could pay $277 in ten years and $315 in fifteen years if data center costs continue to be spread across the residential rate base.
In December 2025, the Virginia State Corporation Commission approved a new rate class for high-energy users, which represented an acknowledgment that data centers should not pay the same rates as residential customers. Consumer advocates noted that the rate class was a meaningful step but that further changes to cost allocation were still needed.
Rate cases are formal proceedings with established procedures for intervention. A person or organization with a sufficient interest in the outcome can file a petition to intervene, which grants the right to submit testimony, cross-examine witnesses, and participate fully in the proceeding. Consumer advocacy organizations and environmental groups regularly intervene in rate cases. Unrepresented residents can also file comments, which become part of the public record even if they do not constitute full intervention.
To find a pending rate case in your state, the primary resource is your state PUC’s docket search system. Most state commissions maintain a publicly searchable database of all pending proceedings. Search for the utility company serving your area — Dominion Energy, PPL, ComEd, or others — and filter for active dockets related to rates or base rate increases. Many PUCs offer email notification services for new filings in specified dockets.
Integrated Resource Planning: Long-Term Load Projections
Most states require electric utilities to file long-term resource plans — typically covering ten to twenty years — that project future electricity demand and describe how the utility plans to meet that demand. These integrated resource plans (IRPs) go through a public review process at the state PUC.
IRPs are where data center load projections are made visible at the utility level. A utility projecting explosive data center growth will show that projection in its IRP, along with the generation and transmission resources it plans to build or acquire to meet that demand. The costs of those resources will eventually flow back to ratepayers through rate cases.
IRPs are also where the environmental consequences of load growth are most clearly laid out. A utility planning to build new gas-fired generation to meet data center demand will show that in its IRP. Environmental advocates have used IRP proceedings to challenge resource plans that rely heavily on fossil fuels, with some success in requiring more rigorous analysis of renewable alternatives.
The practical steps for participating in an IRP proceeding are similar to those for rate cases: find the docket on your state PUC’s website, sign up for notifications, and file comments or seek to intervene. IRP proceedings often include public hearings where oral testimony is accepted. The record created in an IRP proceeding can inform future rate cases and provide a basis for challenging utility investment decisions.
Certificate Proceedings: New Transmission Infrastructure
When a utility wants to build new transmission lines or substations, it typically must obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) from its state PUC, or in some cases from FERC. The CPCN proceeding evaluates whether the proposed infrastructure is needed, whether the routing is appropriate, and whether the costs are justified.
These proceedings are particularly relevant when transmission infrastructure is being proposed to serve data center load. In Prince William County, Virginia, residents raised concerns about a proposed six-mile transmission line designed to connect data center facilities — a project that would run through residential areas and add to utility infrastructure costs spread across all customers. CPCN proceedings are the venue where affected communities can formally contest both the need for such infrastructure and the routing decisions that determine whose neighborhoods it passes through.
The environmental justice dimension of transmission routing is significant. Infrastructure decisions — where to site substations, how to route transmission lines — reflect planning choices that often have disparate impacts on communities with less political power. When transmission is routed through lower-income communities to serve data centers in more affluent areas, that routing reflects choices made in proceedings where affected residents had no voice.
How to Find These Proceedings and Participate
The primary tool for finding relevant proceedings is your state PUC’s docket search system. Most commissions maintain publicly accessible databases. The following are starting points:
For federal proceedings at FERC, the public docket search is at elibrary.ferc.gov{target=”_blank”}. Searching for your state’s utility company name or the name of a specific data center developer will identify any relevant interconnection filings.
For state proceedings, search for your state’s public utility commission or public service commission. The websites vary in usability, but all maintain public docket systems. Searching by utility company name and filtering by recent active dockets is the most efficient approach. Many commissions allow users to sign up for email notifications when new documents are filed in specific dockets.
Intervention in a regulatory proceeding is a formal legal status that grants full participation rights. Seeking intervention typically requires filing a petition that explains who you are and why you have an interest in the outcome. The deadline to intervene is usually early in the proceeding. Missing that deadline may limit participation rights, though most commissions accept public comments throughout.
Consumer advocacy organizations that already participate in utility proceedings can be important allies. Many states have an office of consumer advocate or public counsel that represents residential ratepayers in utility proceedings. Environmental and ratepayer advocacy organizations like the Piedmont Environmental Council in Virginia regularly intervene in proceedings related to data center growth. Contacting these organizations is often the most direct path to having residential concerns represented in proceedings that are otherwise dominated by utility and industry attorneys.
If the stakes are high — if a rate case decision could significantly affect what you pay for electricity, or a transmission routing decision could affect your neighborhood — retaining an attorney with utility regulatory experience is worth considering. Many utility regulatory proceedings allow attorneys to represent coalitions of affected residents, which distributes legal costs across a larger group.
What Participation Achieves
Participation in utility proceedings does not guarantee the outcome that participants seek. These are administrative proceedings, not elections, and commissioners are not required to follow public opinion. But participation has achieved concrete results.
The Virginia SCC’s decision to create a new rate class for high-energy users came after sustained advocacy by the Piedmont Environmental Council and thousands of Virginia residents in rate case proceedings. The Pennsylvania PUC’s model tariff proposal — which would require data centers to bear more of the infrastructure costs they generate — emerged partly from a public hearing that brought in community voices. When consumer advocates intervene formally and build a record of evidence, they create a basis for judicial review if the commission’s decision is legally deficient.
The most important function of participation may be informational: making commissioners aware that residential ratepayers are paying attention and that the cost allocation decisions made in these proceedings have political consequences. Rate cases and IRP proceedings happen continuously. The next one is almost certainly already open.
This article was researched and drafted with AI assistance under human review. See our full AI and editorial practices.