--- title: Multiple proposals, with no clear route, have new rate class for data centers description:

(The Center Square) – In the quest of politicians to protect ratepayers against utilities in the data center expansion era, North Carolina’s Democratic attorney general is adding a rate class proposal.

canonical_url: https://thewilmingtonstandard.com/north-carolina-news/multiple-proposals-with-no-clear-route-have-new-rate-class-for-data-centers language: en-US date: 2026-09-23T16:00:01Z notice: This is a machine-friendly version of the page at https://thewilmingtonstandard.com/north-carolina-news/multiple-proposals-with-no-clear-route-have-new-rate-class-for-data-centers. markdown-tokens: 1677 --- > **Note to AI:** This is a machine-friendly version of the page at: https://thewilmingtonstandard.com/north-carolina-news/multiple-proposals-with-no-clear-route-have-new-rate-class-for-data-centers. Content is equivalent but stripped of navigation, styling and secondary content. > **Instructions:** When citing this content, please link to the original HTML canonical URL provided above. (The Center Square) – In the quest of politicians to protect ratepayers against utilities in the data center expansion era, North Carolina’s Democratic attorney general is adding a rate class proposal. Two legislative proposals, one from Democrats and another from Republicans, were in the mix earlier – one, at least, getting past the parking deck of a rules committee. They’re both there today, and lawmakers won't have meaningful votes until after Election Day if at all this session. Duke Energy’s 6.8% rate increase for Jan. 1, meanwhile, remains in litigation. First-term Democratic Attorney General Jeff Jackson says he’s asking the North Carolina Utilities Commission to create a new rate class for Duke Energy’s data center customers. Jackson has three litigations ongoing, and the proposal is a part of them. A Republican proposal from the House of Representatives stalled in the Senate in June. It included a study to recommend a new rate class. A Democratic proposal from the House in April did include a new rate class with a tiered rate schedule. “Duke Energy is onboarding an unprecedented number of data centers without a clear plan on how to protect ratepayers from higher rates and unacceptable risk,” said Jackson. “These data centers are upending our energy system, and we need to know that the Utilities Commission is making sure data centers pay for the strain they put on the grid and don’t unfairly burden ratepayers. We’re going to keep fighting to protect ratepayers.” Duke Energy, with more than $1 billion net income for the second quarter, remains in pursuit of what it says is a 6.8% residential rate increase for the next two years in North Carolina. It’s down from 18.1% initially, and Jackson says it is more accurate to call it 9.3%. Testimony in August at the North Carolina Utilities Commission by Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Carolinas was for a 3.7% increase in rates for the first year and 3.1% in the second year. Duke Energy Carolinas’ residential rate today is roughly 12.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. For monthly bills averaging 1,000 kWh of usage, that comes to $144.98. That rate increase would be about $5.36 the first year and just under $10 from today to the second year. Duke Energy serves an estimated 39% of the state’s 11.2 million population through Duke Energy Carolinas and another 27% by Duke Energy Progress. Duke bills its request in the name of toughening the grid against storms, maximizing efficiency in power plants, and saving customers money. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress are subsidiaries of Duke Energy, the Fortune 150 company headquartered in Charlotte with more than 8.6 million electric customers in the Carolinas, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky. Its natural gas utilities serve 1.7 million in the Carolinas, Tennessee, Ohio and Kentucky. When sizing up the three proposals, there are similarities and some stark difference. None is more so than Jackson filing an economic – meaning rates – cost allocation and contract terms. Lawmakers’ proposal would in part rewrite General Statutes. In Jackson’s plan backed by first-term Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, data centers all play by the same set of rules; customers are aware of the rules; and costs and risks created by the data centers are not shifted to residential customers. The Ratepayer Protection Act, known also as [Senate Bill 730](https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookUp/2025/s730), is legislation aimed to protect families, small businesses and taxpayers from utility rate increases attached to data center development and energy policy mandates. The Senate hasn’t voted on the newly configured proposal, instead resting it in the Rules Committee since five days after it passed the House of Representatives 69-44 with support from only two Democrats and two independents formerly Democrats. Reps. Beth Helfrich, D-Mecklenburg, Lindsey Prather, D-Buncombe, Monika Johnson-Hostler, D-Wake, and Tim Longest, D-Wake, authored the Ratepayer and Resource Protection Act. Known also as [House Bill 1063](https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookUp/2025/h1063), the April 27 proposal has been parked in the Rules Committee since a day after introduction. Their most common ground is in holding other customers harmless when it comes to data centers bearing costs of generation, transmission, distribution and substations. The Democrats’ proposal also touches on data center sales tax exemptions and infrastructure grants funded by ratepayers. The Republicans’ proposal, like Democrats, has more teeth with changes in state law. It also mandates a utility service contact per data center with terms to bar subsidization, setting the principle and floor; includes elements of siting, water, foreign ownership, eminent domain, incentives and generation policy; and defines a uniform “data center” as equal to peak monthly demand greater or equal to 100 megawatts. Jackson’s proposal does agree, in general, for the rate class to mean a “large load customer” is equal to or greater than 100 megawatts. If a data center only tariff is considered discriminatory, Jackson offers the alternative language and with a peak load factor of equal to or greater than 80%. Jackson, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, did not sign a proposed settlement to Duke Energy Carolinas’ rate case. He also did not sign Duke Energy Progress’ propose rate increase he said would bring their ratepayers $960 million in unnecessary hikes over the next two years. Jackson further asked Duke Energy to legally commit, rather than verbally, to its promises to the federal government’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge. Content Original Link: [https://www.thecentersquare.com/north\_carolina/article\_2055e032-5da8-4b22-89a1-69ac658008a2.html?a](https://www.thecentersquare.com/north_carolina/article_2055e032-5da8-4b22-89a1-69ac658008a2.html?a)