By Todd Snitchler

“Help me help you.” The famous line from the movie Jerry Maguire captures the dynamic facing competitive power markets today.  

RTOs have made meaningful progress in clearing interconnection backlogs. PJM alone has processed more than 140 GW of projects since 2023, with 46 GW already holding signed interconnection service agreements. Across MISO, ERCOT, CAISO and other regions, reforms are moving projects through the queue faster and giving developers greater clarity. 

So, what’s standing in the way?  

Though progress on legislative action has stalled, permitting reform remains a vital step forward — one where policymakers can make a meaningful difference. As Congress reconvenes this September, this critical issue is back on the table. 

That said, while significant, permitting is just one element of a broader landscape of uncertainty that all participants in the power sector must work to resolve. 

Progress in Interconnection, But Projects Still Stalled

Competitive markets have long delivered reliability, efficiency and innovation at lower cost than monopoly procurement. By requiring independent power producers to bear investment risk — rather than captive ratepayers — they drive efficiency and discipline, while shielding consumers from the costs of stranded or uneconomic assets. 

That structure is working. RTOs/ISOs have improved their interconnection processes, and developers continue to pursue projects across technologies even as auction schedules change and regulatory proceedings inject uncertainty. 

Yet interconnection progress alone does not guarantee timely deployment. The challenge now is converting cleared projects into operating megawatts amid heightened uncertainty — a task that demands policy clarity, durable rules and practical coordination beyond the control of market operators alone. 

“Developers stand ready with billions in private capital — but uncertainty stalls projects.” 

A Key Hurdle: Permitting and Siting

Projects that clear the interconnection queue remain delayed by regulatory hurdles across markets (PJM and MISO, in particular): 

• • Federal, state and local permitting delays that stretch timelines for years.
  • Local opposition and litigation that block projects even after contracts are signed. 
  • Policy interventions that prematurely retire resources before replacements are online.   

These barriers block development of resources that already have been cleared by RTOs. PJM’s Reliability Resource Initiative identified 9,300 MW of near-term projects that could be online by 2030, but many hinge on permitting timelines beyond the grid operator’s control. Similar stories are playing out in MISO, CAISO and ERCOT. Markets cannot build around these hurdles. 

Importantly, streamlining these processes does not mean lowering environmental standards. A more efficient, predictable and transparent review can strengthen outcomes — creating clear timelines, improving interagency coordination and delivering legally durable decisions. Predictable processes are essential to keep investment flowing into renewables, storage and dispatchable resources alike. 

“Permitting reform is not about shortcuts — it’s about certainty.” 

Financing, Supply Chains and Policy Uncertainty Add Layers of Risk

With that said, permitting is one major barrier, but not the only one. Developers also must navigate: 

• • Financing uncertainty: Competitive suppliers invest without guaranteed cost recovery; shifting rules and political interventions raise risk premiums and complicate financing. 
  • Supply chain delays: Global shortages and trade policies affect delivery of transformers, turbines, panels and other critical equipment, driving up costs and timelines. 
  • Load forecasting questions: Rapid growth from data centers, electrification and manufacturing challenges traditional forecasting, making it harder to underwrite long-lived investments. 
  • Tariff and trade policy volatility: Changing tariffs or exemptions can materially alter project economics late in the process. 

These hurdles affect resource developers and business models of all kinds, whether they be utilities or independent power producers, or located in vertically integrated and restructured regions alike. 

Policymakers cannot control every factor. But they can reduce risk where it matters most — by providing certainty in permitting and market rules, improving coordination among agencies and reinforcing confidence in competitive markets so private capital can move. 

The Wrong Focus: Political Attacks on Markets

Even as interconnection reforms advance, some governors and utility boards are focusing on the wrong target. Investigations aimed at second‑guessing auction outcomes, calls for price caps or efforts to tilt the field back toward monopoly procurement may be politically tempting in the short term, but they don’t solve the deployment challenge — and they risk making it worse. 

Price caps, in particular, distort the very signals that attract investment. When policymakers override market outcomes, the message to investors is that politics trumps market discipline. The predictable result is reduced investment, weaker reliability and higher long‑term costs. The better approach is to fix the obstacles to building — not to mute the signals that bring private capital to the table. 

“Markets deliver innovation and efficiency. Politics delivers uncertainty.” 

The Risk of Backsliding

Frustration with delays has prompted some to argue for a return to the vertically integrated utility model. That would be a mistake. While monopoly procurement can appear to offer certainty, history shows it often produces inefficiency, cost overruns and stranded risks borne by consumers. Competitive markets discipline investment, reward performance and foster innovation across technologies. The alternative is not better outcomes — it is higher costs and slower progress. 

EPSA’s Balanced Approach to Reform

EPSA supports permitting reform that modernizes NEPA and related statutes to make reviews efficient, predictable and fair — striking “an appropriate balance between environmental protection and building essential infrastructure.” That balance includes: 

• • Definitive timelines for reviews and litigation: Endless procedural delays increase costs and weaken reliability. 
  • Better coordination across agencies: Projects should not be subject to duplicative or conflicting requirements.
  • Certainty for investors: In competitive markets, developers take on significant risk without guaranteed cost recovery. Clear, durable rules are essential to attract investment. 
  • Inclusive benefits: All resource types — renewables, storage and dispatchable generation — face permitting barriers. 

Reform should apply fairly across technologies to ensure a balanced and reliable grid.   

EPSA’s position makes clear: Permitting reform is not about shortcuts. It is about building a transparent, efficient and accountable system that both protects the environment and enables timely development of critical energy infrastructure. 

“The alternative to competitive markets isn’t better outcomes — it’s higher costs and stranded assets.” 

The Path Forward: Certainty, Not Shortcuts

The interconnection backlog is easing, but deployment still lags because multiple external hurdles converge at once. Policymakers can’t solve every problem — nor should they try — but they can reduce uncertainty where only they can: by ensuring clear, consistent, enforceable permitting processes; resisting political interventions that distort market signals; and supporting coordination that aligns siting, environmental review and reliability needs. 

Do that, and private capital will do the rest. Competitive markets have proven they deliver innovation, efficiency and reliability when the rules are clear. Now they need partners to help clear the path. As Jerry Maguire put it: “Help me help you.” 

Todd Snitchler is president and CEO of the Electric Power Supply Association, which represents competitive power suppliers who own and operate around 200 GW of capacity from electricity resources of all types in markets throughout the U.S.