FERC Presses PJM for Grid Reforms as Data-Center Demand Grows
Federal regulators are pressing PJM Interconnection to change how the regional grid operator makes decisions, with FERC Chairman Laura Swett signaling that the organization has until the end of September to reach agreement on reforms.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission held a commission-led technical conference on July 23, 2026, under docket AD26-7-000. The session examined PJM’s board authority, stakeholder voting structure, state participation, transparency, document procedures and filing rights under Section 205 of the Federal Power Act.
FERC did not issue a final reform order at the conference. Instead, the meeting was part of a fact-finding and policy-development process focused on whether PJM can respond quickly enough to changing operational and market conditions.
Why PJM matters
PJM coordinates the flow of electricity and administers wholesale power markets across 13 states and Washington, D.C. The organization says its system serves about 65 million people. It does not own most of the region’s power plants or transmission lines; it operates the system on behalf of many owners and manages markets for large blocks of electricity.
That role gives PJM decisions broad consequences for utilities, power producers, large electricity users and households in its footprint. Local utilities still send bills to customers, but wholesale-market and transmission decisions can influence the costs utilities must recover.
What regulators are examining
FERC’s agenda focused on whether PJM’s governance structure encourages accountability while allowing timely action. Questions included how independently the PJM board can act, whether sector-weighted voting creates delays, and how states should participate in decisions affecting reliability and electricity markets.
The conference also examined Section 205 filing rights. Those rights determine which parties can submit certain proposed changes to FERC for review. Expanding filing rights for states or PJM could give them more direct ways to bring proposals before the commission, although any change would still need to be formally adopted.
Other options discussed included making the stakeholder process primarily advisory, strengthening the independence of PJM’s board, creating faster review procedures for urgent issues and increasing transparency around documents and decision-making.
Why data centers are part of the debate
The governance dispute comes as electricity demand from data centers and other large loads is rising quickly. That growth is occurring alongside limited new generation, transmission constraints and concerns about whether the power system can maintain reliability while accommodating new customers.
Utility Dive reported that Swett said PJM has until the end of September to reach agreement on governance and stakeholder reforms. If that does not happen, she said FERC would impose its own changes. That statement describes an intended enforcement posture, not a completed commission order.
The Associated Press has also reported on a voluntary federal pledge intended to keep data-center development costs from being shifted to households and small businesses. That pledge does not settle how grid upgrades, new generation or transmission investments will be paid for.
What households should watch
The practical question is not whether every electricity customer will see an immediate change. The effect will depend on the reforms ultimately adopted, future capacity-market rules, new generation, transmission investment and decisions about which customers pay for infrastructure.
FERC is expected to hold a stakeholder dispute-resolution forum in September. Readers should watch for a formal PJM reform filing, additional FERC notices and any later order that changes board authority, stakeholder voting, state participation or cost-allocation rules.
For now, the July 23 conference marked pressure for change, not a final restructuring of PJM. The broader dispute is about who has enough authority to act when demand is changing quickly—and how to preserve accountability while protecting reliability and ratepayers.
Sources
Look for updates to this story
Discover more from Interactive News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.