PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Riley, Josh [D-NY-19] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 11, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10284 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10284 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10284 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10284 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The bill would limit how certain electric utilities use customers’ smart-meter data, allowing use only for specified operating purposes. It would apply to state-regulated utilities that are not wholly owned by United States persons. If the Federal Trade Commission found an improper use, the utility would have to credit the affected customer’s bill at three times the revenue attributable to that use.
A covered utility may not use (including to license, sell, or otherwise monetize or use for commercial purposes) the personal consumption data of an electric consumer that the covered utility serves unless such use is for an authorized operational purpose.
The term covered utility means a State regulated electric utility (as such term is defined in section 3 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 21 2602)) that is not wholly owned by United States persons.
If the Federal Trade Commission determines that a covered utility used the personal consumption data of an electric consumer in violation of subsection (a), the covered utility shall credit the bill of that electric consumer in an amount that is 3 times the revenue attributable to such use.
The proposed protections would cover data collected by a smart meter: a digital device that records electricity use in near real time and automatically sends that data to a covered utility.
The term personal consumption data means data collected by a smart meter.
The term smart meter means a digital device that records the use of electric energy by an electric consumer in near real time and automatically communicates that data to a covered utility.
Allowed uses would be billing, managing outages, maintaining a reliable electric grid, complying with regulations, and customer-authorized demand response programs—programs for adjusting electricity use. Licensing, selling, and other commercial uses would fall under the same restriction.
The term authorized operational purposes means billing, outage management, electric grid reliability, regulatory compliance, and electric consumer-authorized demand response programs.
A covered utility may not use (including to license, sell, or otherwise monetize or use for commercial purposes) the personal consumption data of an electric consumer that the covered utility serves unless such use is for an authorized operational purpose.
Each covered utility would have to report to the Federal Trade Commission within one month after its fiscal year ends. The report would describe the types of customer data collected that year, how the utility used it, and whom it shared it with.
Each covered utility shall, not later than 1 month after the end of each fiscal year of the covered utility, submit to the Federal Trade Commission a report on how the covered utility uses the personal consumption data of electric consumers that the covered utility serves, which shall include— (1) what type of personal consumption data the covered utility collected from electric consumers during such fiscal year; (2) how the covered utility used that personal consumption data; and (3) with whom the covered utility shared that personal consumption data.
A utility could not recover the cost of required bill credits from any of its electricity customers. The Federal Trade Commission could consult the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when administering these credits.
In carrying out paragraph (1), a covered utility may not recover, from any electric consumer that the covered utility serves, the cost of any amount credited under such paragraph.
In carrying out this subsection, the Federal Trade Commission may consult with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
The Federal Trade Commission would enforce the requirements using its existing statutory powers. Violations would be treated as violations of a rule concerning unfair or deceptive practices, with the penalties, privileges, and immunities provided by the Federal Trade Commission Act.
A violation of this section or a regulation promulgated under such section shall be treated as a violation of a regulation under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices.
The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this section and the regulations promulgated under such section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this Act. Any person who violates such section or a regulation promulgated under such section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act.
A state attorney general who reasonably believed a violation harmed or threatened residents’ interests could sue on their behalf in an appropriate state or federal court. The state could seek orders stopping violations or requiring compliance, compensation for residents, and other appropriate remedies.
In any case in which the attorney general of a State has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of such State has been or is threatened or adversely affected by an act or practice in violation of this section, or a regulation promulgated under such section, the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action on behalf of the residents of the State in an appropriate State court or an appropriate district court of the United States to— (A) enjoin such act or practice; (B) enforce compliance with such section or such regulation; (C) obtain damages, restitution, or other compensation on behalf of residents of the State; or (D) obtain such other legal and equitable relief as the court may consider to be appropriate.
Before filing such a lawsuit, a state attorney general would have to give the Federal Trade Commission written notice and the complaint. If advance notice were not feasible, these materials would be due immediately upon filing. The Commission could join the case, be heard on all matters after joining, and file petitions for appeal.
Before filing an action under this subsection, the attorney general of the State involved shall provide to the Federal Trade Commission a written notice of such action and a copy of the complaint for such action. If the attorney general determines that it is not feasible to provide the notice described in this paragraph before the filing of the action, the attorney general shall provide written notice of the action and a copy of the complaint to the Federal Trade Commission immediately upon the filing of the action.
On receiving notice under paragraph (2) of an action under this subsection, the Federal Trade Commission shall have the right— (i) to intervene in the action; (ii) upon so intervening, to be heard on all matters arising therein; and (iii) to file petitions for appeal.
While a federal civil enforcement case brought by the Federal Trade Commission or the U.S. Attorney General was pending, a state attorney general could not bring a case under this provision against the same defendants for violations alleged in the federal complaint.
If the Federal Trade Commission or the Attorney General of the United States has instituted a civil action for violation of this section or a regulation promulgated under such section (referred to in this subparagraph as the Federal action), no State attorney general may bring an action under this subsection during the pendency of the Federal action against any defendant named in the complaint in the Federal action for any violation of such section or regulation alleged in such complaint.
For these lawsuits, state attorneys general would retain their state-law powers to investigate, administer oaths, and compel witnesses and evidence.
For purposes of bringing a civil action under this subsection, nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent an attorney general of a State from exercising the powers conferred on the attorney general by the laws of such State to conduct investigations, administer oaths and affirmations, or compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documentary and other evidence.
The Federal Trade Commission would have to establish reasonable standards for protecting and retaining smart-meter data used for an allowed operating purpose.
The Federal Trade Commission shall establish reasonable security and retention standards for any personal consumption data used for an authorized operational purpose.
The bill would establish a federal minimum for privacy protection while preserving stronger state laws protecting personal consumption data.
This Act establishes a Federal baseline and does not preempt State laws providing stronger privacy protections for personal consumption data.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 11, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on September 3, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-11T15:37:15Z. 2026-09-03: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2026-09-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The text contains an ownership-based exclusion from its main regulatory requirements. This classification describes differential treatment, not its justification or effects.
State-regulated electric utilities wholly owned by United States persons would fall outside the definition of covered utility and therefore outside the bill’s covered-utility data-use restriction. This gives those utilities an ownership-based exclusion from the central privacy requirement; the bundle does not define United States persons.
The term covered utility means a State regulated electric utility (as such term is defined in section 3 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 21 2602)) that is not wholly owned by United States persons.
A covered utility may not use (including to license, sell, or otherwise monetize or use for commercial purposes) the personal consumption data of an electric consumer that the covered utility serves unless such use is for an authorized operational purpose.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 11, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI