The Statement of Expectations for Responsible Data Center Development and Operations in Massachusetts is a guidance document issued by the Commonwealth's Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs with the Office of Governor Maura Healey and Lieutenant Governor Kim Driscoll. It sets out eight areas of expectation for data center development, written throughout in the hortatory voice, and states that it "supplements, and does not replace, existing state and local siting, permitting, and regulatory requirements." Its binding force is derivative: Massachusetts Executive Order 658, issued 8 September 2026, conditions covered permit determinations on conformance with it. The page subtitle as published describes the framework as "one of the most comprehensive frameworks in the nation, covering cost, energy, water, air, noise, jobs and other impacts."
The document carries no date on its face at the mass.gov URL; 25 June 2026 comes from the records that first named it rather than from the document.
Scope and the two hooks
The framework states that it provides clarity for developers considering Massachusetts projects on responsible practices, and "explicit expectations for those seeking the sales and use tax exemption under Massachusetts law (M.G.L. c. 64H, § 6(zz))." It is also to guide executive agencies and municipalities evaluating proposals, executive-agency discussions with the Legislature and municipalities on data center policy, and Department of Public Utilities action within existing authority, including implementation of Executive Order 654 (Massachusetts Executive Order 654 — To Secure Massachusetts' Energy Future (March 16, 2026)).
Two scopes therefore run in parallel and should not be conflated. The framework's general expectations apply to data center development at large, with its sharpest conditions attaching to the tax exemption. Executive Order 658's trigger is different — a 25-megawatt peak-demand threshold for state-agency permitting. The 25 MW figure appears in the framework itself only in another context, as the Energy Facilities Siting Board threshold for onsite generation facilities under M.G.L. c. 164, § 69G.
The framework enumerates the existing requirements it supplements: Energy Facilities Siting Board requirements for onsite generation above 25 MW; Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act review where applicable; Water Management Act requirements under M.G.L. c. 21G; and local zoning, building, traffic and noise requirements. It also positions itself as a tool for agencies to evaluate existing regulations and permitting processes for alignment, "recognizing that, in some areas, additional legislative authority is needed."
The general standard
Before the eight numbered areas, the framework states a cost-allocation principle: "Massachusetts energy consumers, communities and residents should not bear the costs or burdens of data center development, operations, or energy and water needs," and should instead realise benefits in economic opportunity, job creation, grid and infrastructure reliability, and local tax revenue. Seven outcomes follow — full project-borne cost of energy supply, infrastructure, system upgrades and interconnection with no shifting to other consumers; clean energy supplies; no degraded local grid reliability, increased congestion and related prices, or stranded-cost risk to other customers; no unfunded infrastructure or environmental and public-health burden on host and neighbouring communities, "especially where this may exacerbate the cumulative impact of existing burdens"; no compromise to water supply, availability or quality for host or neighbouring communities, "particularly during drought conditions"; local employment, commerce and community improvement; and transparency in community dealings and reporting.
It then adds that data centers receiving the tax exemption "should provide demonstrable public benefits and avoid potential public harms," and that the sections below "provide examples of pathways to achieving outcomes."
The eight areas of expectation
1. Energy supply ("Bring Your Own Clean Energy"). The framework's own quoted heading. New data centers should supply or directly procure the energy needed to serve their load consistently with affordability and reliability for all consumers and with Massachusetts climate and clean energy law. Named pathways: bringing or funding clean generation sufficient to meet 100% of the facility's demand, on-site or connected or able to deliver into ISO-New England and aligned with Clean Energy Standard eligibility at 310 CMR 7.75; participating in statewide clean energy procurement mechanisms coordinated with the Department of Energy Resources; prioritising on-site clean energy; and addressing ratepayer impacts from timing gaps between new generation and load growth, with a ratepayer protection fund given as the example.
2. Energy efficiency, flexibility and system optimization. Coordination with ISO-NE and utilities to avoid transmission and distribution stress and unnecessary infrastructure expansion, with data centers operating "as grid-supportive resources." Named pathways: efficient design and operating practices per EPA Energy Star, the International Organization for Standardization and LEED for Data Centers; participation in demand response and load flexibility programs; deployment of solar, storage and advanced energy management to mitigate capacity expansion; and partnership with neighbouring communities and utilities on networked geothermal, microgrids and virtual power plants or similar distributed aggregations.
3. Local air quality and public health. Host and neighbouring communities "should not experience increased exposure to harmful air pollutants." Named pathways: alternatives to diesel backup generation where technically feasible, including solar, storage and fuel cells; minimising noise and localised air pollution and mitigating cumulative impacts; and using MassEnviroScreen to identify and mitigate cumulative burdens.
4. Water use and infrastructure protection. Communities should not face water scarcity or added system costs, and development should not strain water or wastewater systems or harm water quality, aquatic species or habitat, with all operational and related infrastructure costs borne by the developer. Named pathways: demonstrating sufficient water availability and infrastructure capacity without adverse effect on existing users or development plans and responsiveness to drought measures; funding water infrastructure upgrades, hazard mitigation or alternatives addressing incremental use or quality impacts; water-efficient cooling and reuse including closed-loop systems using Best Available Control Technology and wastewater or greywater reuse where feasible; demonstrating consistency with the Water Management Act (M.G.L. c. 21G) and its mitigation requirements, the Interbasin Transfer Act (M.G.L. c. 21, §§ 8B–8D), local water supply permits and local water resource protection zoning; preventing contaminant introduction to drinking water sources and avoiding added pollutant load or treatment burden; and ensuring sufficient wastewater and pre-treatment capacity so receiving-water temperature and quality are not adversely affected.
5. Responsible labor practices and job creation. Public incentives "should translate into good employment opportunities and workforce benefits for Massachusetts residents." Named pathways: project labor agreements and/or labor peace agreements; local hiring, workforce training and registered apprenticeship programs; and safe working conditions with fair wages and benefits for residents of host and surrounding communities.
6. Community benefit and engagement. Communities "should share in the value created and have a meaningful role in project development," and siting should not exacerbate existing inequities. Named pathways: early, transparent and ongoing engagement with residents, neighbouring municipalities and regional planning agencies; community benefit plans and agreements developed with local stakeholders and aligned with the Standards and Guidelines for Community Benefits Plans and Agreements established by the Office of Environmental Justice and Equity within the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs; use of MassEnviroScreen to protect neighbourhoods carrying historic and current disproportionate social and public-health burdens; and benefits that "exceed required mitigations," such as local investments, infrastructure improvements or community services.
7. Local economic development and innovation leadership. Economic benefit should extend beyond construction to sustained development, and the framework notes that land used for data centers "could have had other high value use cases." Named pathways: supporting local and in-state businesses, including those benefiting from low-latency computing; contributing to local tax bases and long-term regional activity; prioritising partnerships with Massachusetts-based suppliers and industries; and attempting to avoid areas designated for other priorities where feasible, or investing to mitigate economic opportunity costs.
8. Project transparency. Developers should supply the information agencies, municipalities and communities need for informed decisions, and — "[r]egardless of whether a project receives the tax exemption" — "state agencies, municipalities, and communities should avoid signing non-disclosure agreements," an expectation directed at the government side of a negotiation. Disclosure should occur upon permitting with regular subsequent reporting, covering location, size, physical footprint and reasonably expected expansion of footprint or equipment; expected annual and peak electric and gas demand, on-site fossil fuel use, energy and water efficiency measures, annual and peak water consumption and water sourcing, plus publicly disclosed toxic use reduction and wastewater management plans including inventories of hazardous substances used, stored, discharged or transferred off-site; whether the facility has more than one electric grid interconnection request at distribution or transmission level; anticipated construction and post-construction employment, wages, and supply chain needs; and independent verification of disclosures with attestations.
Equity in large loads, and implementation
A separate section extends the standard beyond data centers. Data centers "regardless of whether they receive the sales and use tax exemption, and other large load customers should be held to similar standards related to DPU regulatory processes and utility tariffs," and all large loads should comply with state climate, clean energy, land use, environmental, equity and economic opportunity requirements. As the Department of Public Utilities implements Executive Order 654's directive on safe and reliable grid operation amid growth in large commercial customers — Section 3(4) of that order (Massachusetts Executive Order 654 — To Secure Massachusetts' Energy Future (March 16, 2026)) — it should ensure that regulatory frameworks, tariffs and cost allocation mechanisms "advance reliability and protect ratepayers from costs associated with large load interconnection, stranded investments, and infrastructure, including data centers, generally," and that frameworks apply consistently to large load customers while recognising differences in scale, operational characteristics and system impacts.
The closing section restates the expectation that projects "bring their own clean energy, avoid shifting or increasing costs to other energy consumers, protect environmental and community health, avoid placing additional environmental and social burdens on already Burdened Areas, and contribute meaningfully to the local and state economy and clean energy goals." The Executive Offices of Economic Development and of Energy and Environmental Affairs are to develop and disseminate a municipal siting resource guide. All executive agencies are to implement the guidance "as authorized by and consistent with current state law," and to use it in evaluating existing regulations and permitting processes, "recognizing that, for some areas, additional legislative authority is required."
Provenance
Captured on 2026-09-12 from mass.gov, complete: Overview, all eight numbered expectation areas, the Equity in Large Loads and Energy Use section, and the Expectations and Guidance in Practice section. A PDF of the same title (226.43 KB) is attached to the page. Seven divergences and cautions are recorded in the raw file's ## Source-fidelity notes; the material ones are the absent date, the hortatory modality and its derivative binding force through Executive Order 658, and the distinction between the tax-exemption hook and Executive Order 658's separate 25-megawatt trigger. Massachusetts Executive Order 654 is named twice in the framework and once in Executive Order 658 and is not held.
Relationships
- supports: Massachusetts Executive Order 658 — Responsible Data Center Development and Operations — the standard every covered permit determination under Section 1 of that order turns on
- instance-of: Data Center Siting / AI Power Politics — state-level conditions on siting, cost allocation and disclosure
- related: AI Data Centers — the "bring your own clean energy" expectation and the ratepayer-protection pathway
- related: AI Environmental Impact — the water, air-quality and cumulative-burden expectations
- related: Massachusetts economic development bill — AI safety provisions (2026) — the sales and use tax exemption the framework's sharpest expectations attach to
- related: Pennsylvania Executive Order 2026-05 (Data Centers) — a parallel state executive action on data center siting