U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) has introduced the Decentralized Access to Technology Alternatives Act of 2026, which would let large customers like data centers set up their own private power grids that are exempt from economic regulation.
Large customers would be responsible for the own grids, which could not connect to the bulk power system at all.
“American dominance in artificial intelligence and other crucial emerging industries should not come at the expense of Arkansans paying higher energy costs,” Cotton said in a statement. “My bill will ensure that America can continue to lead in these spaces by eliminating outdated regulations.”
The bill authorizes the establishment of “consumer-regulated electric utilities” (CREUs) that are made up of an electric generation and supply system that is established exclusively for new electric loads that were not previously served by any retail electric suppliers. CREUs would be allowed to build generation, energy storage, transmission and distribution subject to the condition that they are islanded from all regulated utilities and the broader grid, and that they operate independently of any public utilities.
The rule even applies to ERCOT because it exempts any CREUs there from the application of the Federal Power Act’s mandatory reliability standards that apply to the Texas grid.
CREUs around the country would be exempt from the FPA and any regulation by FERC, or the Department of Energy. The law also exempts the new utilities from the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 and the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005.
The exemptions from federal economic regulation would be lifted if a CREU decided to connect to the bulk power system, or any electric transmission and distribution system, for primary or back-up power.
Cato Institute Director of Energy and Environmental Policy Studies Travis Fisher has been a proponent of CREUs for some time and said in an interview with RTO Insider that the construct also likely needs state legislation to become a reality. Cotton’s bill would ensure the FPA and its regime, under Section 215, of mandatory reliability standards does not apply to the islanded “utilities.”
“A lot of industrial consumers try really hard to minimize the amount of their system that falls under the bulk power system, because then you become a NERC registered entity, that brings in all sorts of compliance costs and headaches. So, I think it makes perfect sense that an islanded system wouldn’t be part of the bulk power system, but under a plain reading of Section 215, it’s not clear that that would be the case.”
Alternatively, federal legislation could just exempt CREUs from the mandatory reliability standards. Cotton’s bill would ensure they face no other complications from federal economic regulations, he added.
“I think you would need a state law to exempt a CREU from state jurisdiction, and you would need a federal law to exempt, in theory, from federal rules,” Fisher said. “So basically, you need both. I think there’s going to be a lot of people who choose the island even without the federal law, but I can’t imagine seeing people choose an island without the state law.”
New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah have passed laws that allow CREUs. The American Legislative Exchange Council has a model bill for other states, he added.
CREUs are similar to long-standing industry concepts like co-generation, microgrids, co-located generation, or the newer term of art — energy parks. But they must be islanded from the grid entirely, which is not necessarily the case for those other concepts.
“As soon as you connect to the grid, you can’t really plausibly claim that you shouldn’t be regulated because there’s all sorts of concerns about how you might cause faults on the grid or shift costs,” Fisher said.
The movement behind CREUs is driven by the desire to meet the demand of new large loads. Fisher said it’s a better idea than turning back the clock on restructuring and going back to the “Southern Co. approach.”
“The thing that’s different is there are really large new customers who are who need to move fast, and are willing to spend a lot,” Fisher said.
Data center developers and other large loads can support expensive generation like nuclear, or renewables, without any chance of spreading costs to others, he added.
Fisher said the way the industry has restructured in ISO/RTO markets and in competitive states is not real competition, with CREUs going even further. Some supporters of restructured markets support CREUs, with the R Street Institute raising Utah’s score on its competition report card after the state passed its law. (See R Street Scorecard Ranks All 50 States on Electric Competition Policies.)
While the CREU concept would exempt large loads and related power infrastructure from economic regulation, any power plants still would need relevant environmental approvals, Fisher said. Building major facilities with their own generation can avoid issues around exacerbating pollution in populated areas under EPA’s rules for National Ambient Air Quality Standards, nitrogen oxide, and sulfur dioxide.
“It doesn’t have to be near population,” Fisher said. “If you’re using solar and batteries, you can put it wherever the sun shines. So that’s the advantage that there’s some flexibility in siting, so that might help with the NAAQS issues, the NOx, SOx — all that stuff. It doesn’t directly get you off the hook from those regs though.”