Search
March 25, 2026

Posted on

Group Raises Questions over MISO IMM Involvement in $22B Tx Plan Complaint

NEW ORLEANS — A new group formed to represent electric ratepayer interests has raised questions about interactions between MISO’s Independent Market Monitor and the state regulatory agencies seeking to overturn the RTO’s $22 billion long-range transmission portfolio through a FERC complaint.

The publication of email records by Manifest Energy coincides with the MISO Board of Directors opening a “best practices review” of the IMM, although the board’s Markets Committee did not publicly cite a link between the two developments when it voted unanimously to begin the examination at a March 24 meeting.

Manifest Energy — which also uses the name Manifest American Energy — said it engaged consulting firm New Fundamentals to conduct an analysis using the firm’s Transmission Governance Intelligence section, which monitors transmission planning processes and regulatory dynamics. The analysis focused on communications related to a FERC complaint disputing the benefits of MISO’s second long-range transmission plan (LRTP) (EL25-109). (See MISO, Stakeholders Appeal to FERC to Leave Long-range Tx Plan Intact.)

The North Dakota-led complaint, which remains pending before FERC, could unravel MISO’s second long-range transmission portfolio and fundamentally alter how MISO plans its long-range transmission, one of the RTO’s raisons d’être.

“When billions of dollars and grid reliability are on the line, transparency is what allows decisions to move forward with credibility,” said New Fundamentals’ Claire Douglass, speaking on behalf of Manifest Energy in a press release. Douglass said Manifest Energy applauds the MISO board’s decision to take “good governance seriously.”

Manifest Energy describes itself as an apolitical initiative bringing together individuals from a range of communities and perspectives focused on lowering energy costs, strengthening grid reliability and improving transparency in how transmission decisions are made. The group said it is working to obtain nonprofit status.

To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.

The Emails

Email records obtained through multistate public records requests reviewed by Manifest Energy show that MISO IMM David Patton was included in — and in some instances responded to — April 2025 email communications referencing an “LRTP Complaint,” alongside state regulatory personnel, outside counsel and consultants associated with the complaint effort.

The records show the circulation of draft materials and invitations to calls concerning the complaint. Patton appears in multiple threads with instances of engagement; however, the records alone do not establish the extent of his role in developing the complaint.

Manifest Energy said the communications raise questions about how the IMM engages with stakeholders in proceedings that may later intersect with the Monitor’s official responsibilities.

Among those included in the communications was Bill Booth, currently a consultant to the Mississippi Public Service Commission, who at the time was working in connection with the North Dakota effort supporting the complaint. The records show Booth coordinating communications and circulating draft materials among participants.

In a July 2025 email that circulated a draft complaint titled “PLEASE READ TODAY — NDPSC Complaint re MISO Tranche 2.1 Benefit Calculations (DRAFT)” and marked “CONFIDENTIAL,” Booth wrote that he had received edits from Patton and that “they’re accurate.” Attachments referenced in that email were not included in the materials produced in response to the North Dakota Public Service Commission records request.

The records also show Patton was invited to a late June 2025 Microsoft Teams call labeled “Metrics Status.” The available records do not establish whether he attended.

In another July 2025 email concerning outreach to additional regulators, Booth wrote, “If we can defeat these metrics now, we won’t [h]ave to deal with them later,” when MISO South becomes the focus of long-range transmission planning.

By late July 2025, North Dakota, Montana, Mississippi, Arkansas and Louisiana had joined the complaint.

In September 2025, the IMM filed comments in the docket in its official capacity, stating that “we find the arguments made in the complaint to generally be sound and accurate.” The filing does not describe the prior communications reflected in the emails.

MISO declined to comment to RTO Insider on whether its best practices review of the IMM is connected to the release of the emails obtained through state records requests.

MISO said a memo it circulated before the March 24 Markets Committee meeting serves as its comment on the matter. The memo said the RTO’s Markets Committee of the Board of Directors “has a fiduciary obligation to review the services of the” IMM to “ensure that we have the right objectives, and we are fully prepared to meet those objectives in a changing environment.”

Stakeholders who asked not to be identified noted a connection between MISO’s review and the release of the emails. Others said the depth of attention Patton appeared to dedicate to North Dakota staffers and others seemed unusual.

The RTO similarly didn’t respond to questions about whether its review would cover the collaboration that took place over 2025 or whether it believed that level of communication was appropriate.

MISO’s rules do not appear to explicitly prohibit the IMM from meetings or communications related to the complaint, including potential input on FERC filings.

Disputes over the degree to which the IMM should be involved in scrutinizing MISO’s transmission planning are not new for the RTO. In 2025, MISO petitioned FERC for a declaratory order to determine whether the RTO’s tariff authorizes the IMM to monitor transmission plans in addition to markets. FERC ultimately decided it’s proper for the IMM to do so — and be compensated by MISO. (See MISO IMM Contends He Should Have Role in Tx Oversight and FERC Sides with Market Monitor over MISO in Compensation Dispute.)

Patton has been outspoken in his opinion that MISO overstates the benefits of its long-range transmission and risks overinvesting by billions of dollars. (See MISO IMM Makes Closing Arguments Against $21.8B Long-range Tx Plan and $21.8B Long-range Tx Plan Goes to Membership Vote; MISO Resolute, IMM Protesting.)

Patton: Discussed Benefits Analysis — Nothing More

Patton said his involvement in the complaint was limited to explaining his own transmission cost-benefit analysis to the parties interested in filing. He said he neither strategized with the complainants nor helped them develop the complaint.

In a phone interview with RTO Insider, Patton said he sees it as his obligation to speak with any stakeholders about his analyses and presentations. He said his decision to speak with stakeholders on data points is not motivated by any potential complaints stakeholders might plan to file against MISO processes, saying it would make no difference.

“It had nothing to do with this being associated with a complaint,” Patton said. He noted that the LRTP complaint relies on his analyses, so it makes sense that complainants would seek him out.

MISO IMM David Patton (left) and fellow IMM Carrie Milton at the March 24 Markets Committee of the MISO Board of Directors | © RTO Insider

Patton said any allegation that he prompted the complaint is untrue. He also said he never billed MISO for any discussions about the complaint.

He also recalled pushing back against requests to become involved in drafting the complaint. He said Manifest Energy appeared to be “manufacturing an interpretation” of what’s happening based on the emails.

Patton told RTO Insider that he had “no indication” from MISO that the best practices review is linked to the email release in any way.

“I talked to lots of people about my analyses,” he said.

Patton said he intends to cooperate with the review, adding that if the review helps spotlight beneficial tasks he’s already doing “that are not easy for people to observe, then it could be a useful process.”

The Review

Meanwhile, MISO’s Markets Committee of the Board of Directors said the review would engage a third party to perform the process and recommend improvements.

MISO Director Barbara Krumsiek told RTO stakeholders the move is “purely a best practice review” to reaffirm a “commitment to openness and transparency.”

Krumsiek said it’s good practice from time to time to evaluate MISO’s major vendors, including the IMM.

“Good governance would suggest from time to time that you do look at your relationship,” Krumsiek said of the MISO-IMM relationship. “I hope that whoever we choose is respectful of the uniqueness of this vendor relationship.”

Patton did not speak during the agenda item discussion preceding the committee’s vote.

“We’re not looking for a third party to tell us what to do … but quantify risks and opportunities for improvements,” MISO Director Theresa Wise added.

Wise said MISO won’t discuss selection of a third-party vendor during the open session of a meeting but revealed that Patton has asked that one, unnamed firm be excluded from a potential list. She said MISO would honor that request.

Director Nancy Lange said she was entering the review process “with an extremely open mind” to see what might need to change or what’s already working.

Multiple members of board said the review process should include stakeholder voices, though they didn’t specify how they would collect their community’s input.

Patton has served as MISO’s external Monitor for more than 20 years.

Later in the meeting, Patton said his monitoring is valuable to MISO. He said over winter 2025/26, for instance, he and his team were able to uncover a software error that caused generators to receive unjustified day-ahead margin assistance payments.

“It’s unlikely that any other Market Monitor would uncover that,” Patton said.

A stakeholder speaking on background said MISO board members moving to investigate Patton after he supported the complaint against the LRTP “smacks of retaliation.”

“The board should recognize how this looks to stakeholders and regulators — MISO attempting to silence objective criticism required by FERC rules and regulations. If this review is warranted, then FERC, not MISO, should conduct the review to ensure an objective, unbiased evaluation. The IMM works for FERC, not MISO,” the source told RTO Insider. The source also questioned MISO’s ability to find a firm that has the “technical and informational wherewithal to evaluate the IMM’s performance.”

The IMM ended 2025 $46,000 over budget, or 0.5% over the budget MISO agreed to. Patton attributed the “small overage” to monitoring suspicious behavior from demand-side resources and concentrating on the root of renewable resources frequently not following MISO’s dispatch orders.

Krumsiek said she would like the IMM to provide budget projections and a “scope of work periodically throughout the year.”

Posted on

FERC Denies Monitor Complaint to Establish PJM Authority to Reject Large Loads

FERC rejected a complaint from the PJM Independent Market Monitor asking it to determine the RTO holds the authority to deny transmission service for large loads that cannot be reliably served (EL26-30).

The March 23 order found the Monitor had not demonstrated PJM would be in violation of statutory or regulatory requirements without that authority, nor would its governing documents be unjust and unreasonable. While NERC standards mandate PJM determine the amount of capacity needed to maintain reliability and identify shortfalls, the RTO is not required to solve deficiencies.

But FERC also noted that “our rejection of a procedurally inadequate complaint is unrelated to the gravity of the issues the deficient complaint raises. Though we find that the IMM failed to meet its burden under Federal Power Act Section 206, we acknowledge that the IMM and commenters raise very important issues regarding the challenges posed by large load additions to PJM’s transmission system, including ensuring reliable transmission service and resource adequacy.”

The Monitor had argued that PJM is considering changes to its capacity market that would allow data centers to come online regardless of whether there is sufficient capacity and transmission capability to cover their load. It said PJM has an obligation to ensure all customers receive reliable service and argued that allowing these large loads to come online would undermine the quality for all other consumers. (See Market Monitor Files Complaint Over PJM Large Load Interconnections.)

To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.

The Nov. 25, 2025, complaint stems from proposals brought by PJM staff and stakeholders during the Critical Issue Fast Path (CIFP) proceeding to identify how to serve ballooning load. The Monitor sponsored the implementation of an interconnection queue for large loads, which would prevent them from coming online until the requisite capacity and transmission is in place. The PJM Board of Managers opted to go with a package of market changes that would create an expedited interconnection track for new resources; require large loads to either bring their own capacity or be subject to curtailment on PJM request; and overhaul the load forecasting process.

PJM responded that the complaint was effectively a petition for a declaratory order seeking to curb the options available to it in the CIFP process and the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking focused on large load interconnection (EL25-49). (See PJM Presents 1st Look at Co-located Load Compliance Filings.)

Several generation owners, data center representatives and utilities protested the filing on the grounds that the Monitor had not shown PJM is failing to meet reliability standards. Constellation Energy, Talen Energy, FirstEnergy and the Electric Power Supply Association submitted protests, and the Data Center Coalition and PJM Power Providers Group jointly requested the commission dismiss the complaint.

The Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club also objected to the Monitor’s complaint, arguing the requested relief was too vague and would impinge on state jurisdiction and PJM’s ability to prevent data center costs from being shifted to other consumers.

While they agreed large load growth threatens reliability and affordability, the issue should be addressed through the several related FERC dockets already open. They pointed to the large load ANOPR, a consumer advocate complaint arguing the capacity market lacks adequate market power mitigation and a complaint from the Office of the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel regarding the growing cost of local transmission projects (EL25-18, EL23-105). (See Consumer Advocates File Wide-ranging Complaint on PJM Capacity Market.)

The commission’s order stated it is “considering and adjudicating” issues raised in the filing in other proceedings and anticipates additional filings from PJM relating to co-locating generation and large loads, a new reliability backstop mechanism and a connect-and-manage framework under which large loads would be required to curtail under strained system conditions.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) submitted comments agreeing with the Monitor that PJM lacks processes to modulate load growth at a time when large loads are driving high market prices and declining reliability. But he argued that “rationing” interconnection service is not the path forward and that PJM should pursue rule changes to allow new capacity to come online faster and incentivize large loads to be curtailable.

Consumer advocates in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, Delaware and Ohio jointly supported the Monitor, arguing that without the authority to reject large load interconnections, PJM’s right to review utilities’ interconnection requests is little more than a rubber stamp. A proactive process for approving new service requests would pace load growth with reliability.

“Aside from fulfilling its fundamental role and obligation of ensuring grid reliability and administering efficient energy and capacity markets, PJM serves no purpose in pursuing the policy aim of continued proliferation of data centers and AI within the region if it conflicts with PJM’s ability to meet its priority obligations,” they wrote. “PJM can and must say ‘no’ to the undisciplined interconnection of data center and AI large loads to the PJM transmission system to protect grid reliability unless and until there exists sufficient resource adequacy.”

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities argued it would be insufficient to leave oversight of large load interconnections to the states, as the cost and reliability impacts of large loads can extend across the PJM region.

Posted on

Transmission Policies in China and Germany Examined in ACEG Webinar

While domestic grid planning’s regional nature offers different policy examples, countries around the world offer even more diverse examples that could inform domestic transmission policy, experts said during a webinar hosted by Americans for a Clean Energy Grid.

China has a large, well-connected national grid now, but its system is regional enough that this was not some inevitable destiny. It was the result of deliberate policy choices, said Michael Davidson, associate professor at the University of California San Diego.

“When I first started studying Chinese energy systems in 2008, there were no UHV [ultra-high-voltage] lines,” Davidson said. “There were a handful of HVDC lines. But now they have over 40 UHV lines. And if you include those HVDC lines, it’s actually closer to 70.”

Building out a backbone transmission system to help grow renewable energy’s share of the grid while ensuring reliability has become a key strategic priority of the central government, he added.

“China actually has some fairly deep provincial fragmentation and a lot of autonomies granted to local governments,” Davidson said. “But during the restructuring of the power sector, which split up the grid company and the separate generation companies, you started to see some synthesis around this. And then, basically through the actions of very connected political leaders and top-down decisions, it was decided in early 2000s to go big on a national backbone.”

The Chinese Communist Party’s latest five-year plan focused on building a “new energy system,” which would be powered by renewable energy, and that means grid planners are focused on projects that help integrate renewable power, he said.

To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.

Any transmission lines 500 kV and above are planned federally, with provincial governments having to site them, but lower-voltage lines are entirely within the remit of the provinces. The planning also includes new sources of renewables, which are built on one side of new lines to bring them to serve load in a city, which means the Chinese avoid the chicken-and-egg problem often seen with generation and transmission domestically, Davidson said.

“All land is owned by the state,” Davidson said. “Even if the land has been allocated for different uses, the state always has significant power, and you don’t face the same legal bottlenecks that you would have in the United States around building new lines.”

The companies building out the grid are state-owned, with massive balance sheets, easy access to financing and much lower returns than U.S. utilities.

While the return to demand growth is a recent trend for U.S. grid planners, China has seen rapid growth for decades, and new demand from manufacturing and other more traditional loads greatly exceeds that from data centers, which Davidson pegged at 10% of incremental load.

“There’s none of the ‘bring your own generation’ kind of situation in China, because there’s just so much ample capacity on the transmission side and on the generation side,” Davidson said. “And now what they’re trying to deal with is how they power these new loads with renewables.”

One area where the U.S. industry is ahead of China is how sophisticated its planning is, with Davidson specifically pointing to CAISO’s 20-year transmission plan as more advanced than Chinese efforts. (See CAISO Sees $30B Need for Transmission Development.)

Germany’s grid is split between four transmission system operators, which is rare for Europe where one entity usually runs a national grid, said Katerina Simou, energy policy adviser at 50Hertz. Her company is partially owned by Elia Group, which runs the grid in eastern Germany and includes its two largest cities, Berlin and Hamburg.

“And in that capacity, we are responsible for optimizing, expanding and planning our extra-high-voltage grids,” Simou said. “We’re also responsible for operating them in a safe and efficient manner, for ensuring security of supply.”

Every two years there is a nationally coordinated planning process between Elia and the other three system operators to match supply and demand over the next 10 to 15 years, she added. Generally, the generation is concentrated in the north and east of Germany and has to flow south and west.

“We have a lot of renewables, particularly offshore here, and a lot of Germany’s heavy industry is located in the south and southwest of the country,” Simou said.

A federal ministry reviews the plan, and Germany’s parliament votes on the largest, most important lines, which acquire a specific legal status where they are considered necessary and urgent, she said.

Posted on

CAISO Monitor Seeks Speedy Replacement of Interim EDAM Congestion Revenue Approach

CAISO’s Department of Market Monitoring urged the ISO to replace its interim congestion revenue allocation rules under its forthcoming Extended Day-Ahead Market “as soon as practicable.”

EDAM’s interim congestion revenue allocation (CRA) rules will apply initially to PacifiCorp, the market’s first participant in May. But these rules can create incentives to self-schedule resources, which can have detrimental market impacts, CAISO’s DMM said in March 9 comments to the ISO’s EDAM initiative.

In 2025, CAISO began work on new CRA rules in cases of parallel — or loop — flows, after Powerex published a paper contending the EDAM model contained a “design flaw” with potentially $1 billion in unjustifiable charges at stake. (See Powerex Paper Sparks Dispute over EDAM ‘Design Flaw’.)

The ISO kicked off an expedited allocation design process in March 2025, resulting in a FERC-approved interim design in August 2025. (See CAISO’s EDAM Scores Simultaneous Wins at FERC.)

To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.

The need to replace the interim CRA rules will become “more important as additional balancing areas join EDAM and increase the potential for cross-BAA congestion impacts within the EDAM,” DMM said.

“There may be several options to replace the interim CRA [and] whichever option is chosen, the replacement allocation should not be tied to the actual schedules in the market, including schedules resulting from cleared economics offers,” DMM said.

Certain CRA designs can create incentives for market participants to submit offers not consistent with their true marginal costs, which “can undermine the purpose of the market and potentially lead to market dysfunction,” DMM said. A CRA replacement process therefore should ensure that a CRA is not tied to cleared schedules in the EDAM, DMM said.

The interim design could incent self-scheduling rather than economic bidding of generation in certain circumstances, CAISO Policy Development Manager Milos Bosanac, told RTO Insider on March 24. The extent to which market participants will exercise their transmission rights through a self-schedule to fully limit their congestion cost exposure is something that will be monitored through operational experience, Bosanac said.

The ISO is committed to transparent and frequent reporting on congestion in the EDAM footprint, bidding patterns and congestion allocation among EDAM balancing areas, he added.

CAISO is in Phase 2 of its CRA design for EDAM, which is looking at how to eliminate or reduce self-schedule incentives and ensure symmetry in allocation of parallel flow congestion revenues for CAISO balancing areas.

Phase 2 will result in a new long-term CRA design to congestion revenue allocation. CAISO plans to release this Phase 2 proposal by Q2 2027, Bosanac said.

CRA design should ensure that revenues are distributed equitably to avoid cost shifts between EDAM BAAs, CAISO staff said in a February presentation on the subject. The new design also should support transmission customers’ firm transmission rights or CRRs so they can manage and hedge congestion risk exposure, staff said.

In January, the California Public Utilities Commission asked CAISO to pause CRAs in EDAM if participants begin to game the market through extensive self-scheduling. (See CPUC Urges ‘Stop the Brakes’ Tool for EDAM Congestion Revenue Approach.)

CAISO must continue to improve its understanding and modeling of unscheduled parallel flows on its system associated with all Balancing Authority Areas (BAA) in the WECC, Justin Cockrell, assistant general counsel with DC Energy California, said in March 9 comments to the ISO.

“This improved understanding and modeling is essential both for developing more accurate CRR auction models and other related CRR enhancements in the CAISO and for developing durable approaches to congestion revenue allocation and seams issues as EDAM expands and evolves,” Cockrell said.

Posted on

NERC: Cyber Event Reports Continued Decline in 2025

In a required annual update to FERC on cybersecurity incidents on the electric grid, NERC reported only a single incident occurred in 2025 that met the ERO’s reporting requirements, down from three the previous year (RM18-2).

However, NERC suggested that rather than being a vindication of the ERO’s cybersecurity policies, the lack of additional incidents may indicate that reporting requirements need to be tightened to improve awareness of cyber threats.

Reliability standard CIP-008-6 (Cybersecurity — incident reporting and response planning) requires electric utilities to report qualifying cybersecurity incidents to the Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center. (See FERC OKs Cyber Reporting Rule.) Reportable incidents are defined in the technical rationale for the standard as those that compromise or disrupt:

    • a cyber system that performs one or more reliability tasks of a functional entity;
    • an electronic security perimeter of a high- or medium-impact grid cyber system; or
    • an electronic access control or monitoring system of a high-impact grid cyber system.

Reports must include the intended effect of the cyber incident, the attack vector of the incident and the level of intrusion the attacker achieved or attempted. They may be submitted through the E-ISAC portal, the NERC EOP-004 reporting form or the Department of Energy’s DOE-417 form. NERC must submit an anonymized summary of the reports to FERC each year, according to FERC Order 848.

To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.

The ERO’s cyber incident report for 2025, released March 20, was light on details. The reporting entity was not identified beyond being in the SERC Reliability region. NERC also did not specify when the incident took place.

NERC did disclose that the incident involved a single medium-impact grid cyber system, which an unidentified intruder attempted to compromise through “connection attempts to multiple external interfaces from a single internet protocol … address.” The attacker did not gain access to the system because network perimeter controls blocked the connection requests, and the target entity activated its cyber incident response plan.

No operational impacts were reported from the intrusion. NERC reported that there was no impact to grid reliability and “the controls in place were effective in identifying and mitigating the attempt to compromise.”

The single incident report collected in 2025 was the lowest since NERC began its annual reporting in 2022. That year, the ERO reported two cyber incidents to FERC that occurred in 2021; subsequent annual reports outlined eight incidents in 2022 and three each in 2023 and 2024. (See ERO Says 2024 Cyber Incidents Showed Increased ‘Sophistication’.)

The ERO wrote in the most recent report that the number may have decreased because of “the subjective criteria to define attempts to compromise,” citing a study it undertook in 2021 to examine registered entities’ implementation of CIP-008-6. The report’s writers mentioned that Project 2022-05 (Modifications to CIP-008 reporting threshold) is underway to clarify the type of events that qualify under the standard.

“NERC is encouraged that there were no reliability impacts from the reported incident … and that the [responsible] entity reported the attempt to compromise to the E-ISAC,” NERC wrote. “However, the diminished number of reports … reinforces the importance of establishing criteria that [do] not rule out attempts to compromise from being reported simply because no harm to, or intent to harm, a [grid cyber system] was identified.”

Posted on

An Electricity Market That’s Bigger Than the Weather

By Alex DeGolia and Michael Bueno

In mid-March, Americans across the West experienced a major heat dome, with temperatures 10 to 30 degrees warmer than average and consistently over 100 degrees Fahrenheit.

It was the latest extreme weather event to challenge grid operators. A key tool during these times is the ability to import and export power via a market, as access to the largest set of resources gives operators the best chance to keep the lights on. And make no mistake. Heat waves like that are going to become a more frequent occurrence as the effects of climate change unfold.

Earlier in March, Arizona Corporation Commission Chair Nick Myers claimed that organizations like the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) were advocating for regional electricity market choices that help California maintain control of the western power markets to benefit the state’s own policy priorities.

This is simply not the case. Groups like EDF advocate for outcomes based on which options, including regional electricity markets, provide the greatest benefits to ratepayers and the environment.

Case in point: recent analysis conducted by Aurora Energy Research and released by EDF showed that Arizona ratepayers could save more than $114 million per year between 2027 and 2040 by joining the Extended Day-Ahead Market (EDAM) as compared to joining SPP’s Markets+. None of that analysis focused on California. (See APS Would See Greater Savings in EDAM, Analysis Finds.)

Electricity market choice is complex and there are many factors that should be considered, but we believe the question of which market saves customers the most money should be at the center of any such decision.

To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.

Reliance Across the West

Events like the recent heat dome underscore why electricity markets matter. It’s not just California. States across the West are reliant on one another to keep electricity reliable and affordable. That’s why the size and configuration of day-ahead markets in the West will greatly impact electricity bills and grid reliability for decades to come.

Alex DeGolia

Since 2014, Arizona ratepayers have saved nearly $1 billion via its participation in the Western Energy Imbalance Market. As utilities and regulators weigh joining the two major day-ahead markets, Extended Day-Ahead Market (administered by the newly formed Regional Organization for Western Energy) or Markets+ (administered by SPP), they should consider the full consequences of the decision.

The configuration of Western markets — and which market individual utilities ultimately join — will have enormous consequences for customers because seams between the two markets are not trivial. While they exist currently between different balancing authorities, the implications of future seams in the West, including the seam that will surround states like Arizona, are much more significant going forward than under the status quo — with greater financial and reliability consequences. This interdependence is precisely why the conversation around regional market development, and the choice of market like that in Arizona, matters so much.

Michael Bueno

For example, during Winter Storm Fern in January, real-time prices in PJM consistently hovered in the $250-$500/MWh range, with day-ahead prices spiking to over $2,000/MWh. Meanwhile, real-time prices on the other side of the seam in MISO were negative for nearly two consecutive days, hitting as low as -$315/MWh in the Chicago area. This enormous inefficiency caused by a market seam underlines the fact that transmitting electrons between markets adds costs. Without a course correction, Arizona utilities are on a path to essentially island the state.

Households across the West, especially those in Arizona, already are struggling to pay their electric bill. Arizona Public Service (APS) has asked the Arizona Corporation Commission for a rate increase of 14% by the end of 2026, while Tucson Electric Power (TEP) has sought roughly the same increase for its customer base.

Both utilities have committed to joining Markets+. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes is intervening in both proceedings over concern that the requested rate increase would result in too high of a burden on consumers.

Accurate and Timely Information

APS, TEP and the Salt River Project have argued that they see substantial benefits to joining Markets+ over EDAM, but the modeling they reference is outdated and the utilities have not provided transparent information on the underlying assumptions. This decision is important and it should be driven by accurate and timely information.

The Aurora analysis contracted by EDF is one of the only independent market choice studies conducted to date that evaluates the implications of the decision on Arizona’s utilities. It’s worth emphasizing that the focus of EDF’s analysis wasn’t California, but the impact of utility market decisions on Arizona.

The topline takeaway of the analysis is straightforward: the bigger the market, the bigger the savings. The analysis also shows that distributional effects of market benefits can vary by utility (modest system cost increase for one utility, along with larger statewide savings), which is another reason why these decisions require more regulatory scrutiny.

Families across the West are grappling with high electricity bills and whether they can afford to run their AC during an extreme heat event. Coordination through a regional market can ease these pressures, but as the Aurora analysis shows, not all markets provide equal benefits.

Utilities and their regulators should consider how these benefits compare across market options, and in places like Arizona, more work is needed to show their choices are in the best interest of their customers.

Alex DeGolia is director of state legislative and regulatory affairs and Michael Bueno is senior manager of state climate policy and strategy at the Environmental Defense Fund.

Posted on

Company Briefs

AEP Names Brian Abraham President of Appalachian Power

AEP named Brian Abraham its next president and COO of Appalachian Power, effective April 13.

Abraham currently serves as the chief of staff for Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.) and was appointed during Justice’s second term as governor. He will succeed Aaron Walker, who became vice president of Engineering and Quality, Nuclear Development.

More: MetroNews; Charleston Gazette-Mail

Uber to Invest $1.25B in Rivian to Launch Robotaxis

Uber plans to invest up to $1.25 billion in EV maker Rivian as part of an agreement to deploy 50,000 robotaxis through 2031.

Uber will purchase 10,000 autonomous R2 EVs with the option to buy an additional 40,000 beginning in 2030. The deal includes an initial $300 million investment in Rivian, which is preparing to begin R2 sales later in spring.

The companies said the robotaxis are expected to be available in 25 cities across the U.S., Canada and Europe, with San Francisco and Miami being the first in 2028.

More: CNBC

GM, LG Recall Workers to Retool Tennessee Battery Plant

General Motors and battery partner LG ​Energy Solution will recall 700 laid-off ​workers to transform an EV battery plant in Tennessee to ​make batteries for energy storage systems.

The companies, through their joint venture Ultium Cells, will recall the workers to start production of lithium-iron phosphate batteries at the plant in ​the second quarter. Ultium in January laid off workers at the plant and at another facility in Ohio through mid-2026 due to slow EV sales.

More: Reuters; Canary Media

LG Solution Plant to Supply Tesla with Batteries

LG Energy Solution announced it has agreed to a $4.3 billion deal to build batteries for Tesla’s grid-scale energy storage systems at its Lansing, Mich., plant.

The plant was originally built to supply EV batteries for General Motors before the company sold its stake in the facility in 2024. LG Energy Solution has since pivoted to lithium-iron-phosphate battery cells meant to store electricity to power homes and businesses.

More: Bridge Michigan

Posted on

State Briefs

ALABAMA

House Passes Bill Requiring Open PSC Rate Hearings

The House of Representatives voted 104-0 to pass a bill that would require the Public Service Commission to hold rate case hearings every three years.

Supporters said the legislation is aimed at increasing accountability and public participation in how rates are set. The hearings would be formal and under oath, with subpoena power to gather evidence.

The bill also would prohibit a return on equity greater than the regional average.

More: Alabama.com; WIAT 

FLORIDA

Council Committee Approves JEA Solar Partnership

The Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee voted unanimously to approve closure and abandonment of three rights-of-way to allow the development of a solar array facility.

The land will become one of three solar farms that will sell power to JEA. JEA, which owns the land, will buy power from Florida Renewable Partners, which will build, own and operate the facility.

A full council vote was set for March 24.

More: Jacksonville Daily Record

MARYLAND

House Passes Bipartisan Energy Bill

The House of Representatives voted to pass the Utility RELIEF Act.

The legislation would reduce a surcharge on monthly bills that supports the EmPOWER program, which gives customers free or reduced-price smart thermostats and efficient appliances. The bill also changes the way utilities request rate increases by discontinuing the use of spending forecasts, encourages transmission upgrades instead of new lines and regulates data centers. The governor’s office estimated it would save ratepayers an average of $150/year.

The bill now goes to the Senate.

More: Maryland Matters

MASSACHUSETTS

Order Mandates 15-month Permitting Deadline for Renewables

Gov. Maura Healey signed an executive order mandating a 15-month limit for state and local permitting decisions on large-scale renewable infrastructure.

The mandate also will create an Energy Infrastructure Siting and Permitting Council that will oversee the regulatory framework and coordinate agencies to prevent the slowing of the state’s renewable transition. Smaller projects would face a one-year approval window.

The Healey administration aims to create 4 GW of new solar capacity by 2030.

More: pv magazine

MICHIGAN

DTE, Google Ink Deal to Supply Data Center

Google announced it has reached a 20-year agreement with DTE Energy to power a 1-GW data center.

Google, which is evaluating a 280-acre site near the Detroit Wayne International Airport, said DTE will supply it with 2.7 GW of storage, renewables and grid-sourced power.

More: Bridge Michigan

OHIO

Power Siting Board Blocks Morrow County Solar Farm

The Power Siting Board denied construction of the Crossroads Solar project in Morrow County.

The decision referenced “consistent and substantial opposition to the project by the local population.” However, reporting has found that public comments claiming to be from residents do not align with voter registration records and that false email addresses were provided. The board said those comments were not considered in their decision.

More: WOSU

PENNSYLVANIA

PUC Fines UGI $2.6M for Chocolate Factory Explosion

The Public Utility Commission requested $2.6 million in fines from UGI in relation to a gas leak and explosion at a chocolate factory in Berks County.

The complaint filed by the Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement alleges 27 safety violations related to UGI’s natural gas system.

The explosion, which occurred on March 24, 2023, caused $42 million in property damage and killed seven people. Investigators determined natural gas leaked from a retired plastic service tee connected to a vintage plastic pipeline beneath a street near the factory. The gas migrated underground and entered the building, where it was ignited by an unknown source.

More: WGAL

TEXAS

State Led Nation in Solar Installations in 2025

Texas installed more solar power than any other state in 2025, according to a Solar Energy Industries Association report.

The Lone Star State installed more than 11 GW of solar, more than twice as much as second-place California (4.6 GW). It is at least the third straight year the state has led the nation in solar installations.

The U.S. solar industry installed 43.2 GW overall in 2025, a 14% decrease from 2024.

More: Houston Public Media; SEIA

VIRGINIA

Fluvanna County Approves Gas Plant Permit

The Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors approved a conditional use permit for Tenaska’s second natural gas plant in the county.

The board approved the permit of the 1,540-MW Expedition Generating Station despite a 3-1 vote from the county’s planning commission opposing the plant.

The project still needs State Corporation Commission and Department of Environmental Quality approval and to receive other permits before construction can begin.

More: Virginia Mercury

WISCONSIN

PSC Approves We Energies’ Solar Acquisitions

The Public Service Commission approved We Energies’ purchase of two solar projects for $360 million.

The Good Oak and Gristmill facilities in Columbia County will generate 165 MW and will help supply data centers.

We Energies will own 80% of both facilities. The remaining power will be split between Madison Gas & Electric and the Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

More: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Posted on

Federal Briefs

24 States, Others Sue EPA Over ‘Endangerment’ Finding Repeal

Two dozen states and more than a dozen cities and counties sued EPA, challenging its repeal of the 2009 endangerment finding that determined carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare.

The lawsuit seeks to reinstate the finding and to reverse a related agency move that repealed limits on greenhouse gases produced by vehicles.

Experts believe the Trump administration’s goal is to get the case before the Supreme Court and have its conservative majority reverse the 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA ruling, which was decided by a 5-4 vote. None of the justices who voted in that majority are still on the court.

More: The New York Times; The Associated Press

Dem AGs: EV Charger Proposal Would Make NEVI Program Unusable

Attorneys general from 20 states said a Department of Transportation proposal to require 100% American-made components in EV chargers receiving federal funds would render the $5 billion NEVI program unworkable.

The attorneys general said the proposal to hike “Buy America” requirements from ​55% to 100% would make it “impossible for manufacturers to achieve, frustrate congressional intent ​and impair the public interest by slowing or halting federally funded EV ⁠charger deployment nationwide.” The states said they support requiring Buy America rules, but the production of 100% American chargers is nonexistent, as is the demand for them.

The proposal would take effect once ​the changes are ⁠finalized.

More: Reuters

Trump Temporarily Suspends Jones Act

President Donald Trump issued a 60-day suspension of the Jones Act on March 18.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the goal is to ease supply bottlenecks and lower energy prices amid the Middle East conflict. Waiving the act expands the pool of ships by allowing foreign tankers, which can bring shipping costs down.

More: POLITICO

Posted on

More Baseload Power Needed, DOE’s Wright Says at Conference

HOUSTON — U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright opened the CERAWeek conference with a plenary session during which he praised fossil fuels and bashed clean energy.

He patted himself on the back for delaying the retirement of 17 GW of coal-fired power plants: “We stopped energy subtraction policies.”

He said the coal plants were instrumental in preventing “significant blackouts” during the late January winter storm that pushed the Eastern grid “to the edge.” (See DOE Touts Fossil Fuels’ Role in Meeting Peak Energy Demand This Winter.)

“The truth is simple. Energy is life, and the world needs massively more of it,” he said, taking the stage as a cheering section led by Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum in the front row urged him on.

“President Trump’s goal from Day 1 was to get rid of the nonsense and restore common sense,” Wright said. “That means turbo-charging American energy production, including electricity that’s been relatively stagnant for a few decades. Surging energy production will drive down costs for Americans, drive reshoring of manufacturing back to our country, and that in turn will drive up wages. Lower costs, higher wages. In short, that’s the economic agenda.”

To meet the administration’s goal of leading the world in artificial intelligence, he said the U.S. will have to build more electricity generation, preferably baseload, and do so at a rapid pace.

“We haven’t done that in a while,” Wright said, laying the blame at the feet of Democratic administrations. “No one really wanted to build a new gas or coal generation plant when some time in the near future you were going to have to capture the CO2 emissions from it, use a third of the power from the power plant to capture emissions, and then dispose them in quantity underground, which has never been done at scale. Do you really want to spend $100 for something that might give a $1 benefit? That’s not a businesslike attitude.”

He said that by “clearing out a lot of the morass that disincentivizes people from building things,” the marketplace will sort out winners and losers.

As an example, Wright said the Department of Energy is offering the national laboratories’ more than 1 million acres to companies interested in developing small nuclear reactors. The White House issued an executive order in 2025 that set a DOE goal to have three SMRs reach criticality by July 4, 2026.

“Why this year? Because it’s our 250th anniversary,” he said, acknowledging that the deadline is “an aggressive time frame.”

“As I stand here today, we look to be on track to have three next generation nuclear reactors running. They won’t be selling electricity into the grid, but all the nuclear systems will be running and generating the heat that would be used to produce electricity by July 4,” Wright said.

He said 11 SMR technologies are in the queue. At the same time, DOE is reforming permitting for nuclear reactors and trying to ramp up domestic uranium enrichment, fuel fabrication and reprocessing, and permanent waste disposal sites with a “competitive state-level opt-in process.”

With the Nuclear Regulatory Commission “at our side,” Wright said the agency is asking states to compete to host nuclear innovation campuses that will prove the worth of SMRs.

“These are small SMRs that can be built and constructed quickly. Fortunately, in America’s free market society, there’s a few dozen small modular reactor companies pursuing different technologies [and] different sizes,” he said. “We welcome it all. This will really speed up the development … nuclear has just been slow and hasn’t moved for decades. We want to get it moving quickly so it could win economically.”

Although there have been significant signs of progress for new nuclear power, nuclear analysts say it also faces a long timeline and plenty of potential obstacles. The analysts add that meaningful capacity increases are still years in the future. (See Nuclear Power Retains Great Potential in 2026.)