FERC Rejects PJM’s Curtail-First Plan for New Large Loads, and Keeps Only the 50 MW Definition and a Registry

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rejected the core of the large-load plan from PJM Interconnection on October 9, 2026. The rejected piece is the Interim Resource Adequacy Service, or IRAS. Under IRAS, a new data center or other large load could connect before matching new capacity existed. In return, PJM could curtail that load ahead of other pre-emergency demand response. FERC also rejected the PJM rules for “bring your own new capacity.” It accepted only two parts. One is the PJM definition of a large load as 50 MW or more at one site. The other is a registry that tracks the location, ramp schedule and capacity supply of each large load.

PJM filed the package on August 13 in docket ER26-3515-000. It asked for an October 12 effective date. IRAS itself would have applied to new large loads entering service after June 1, 2027.

Why It Matters

The main FERC objection is jurisdiction, not the curtailment idea. The order says several tariff provisions appear to put obligations directly on new large loads, which are mostly retail customers. Other provisions appear to pick which retail customers get curtailed. The compensation terms appear to set a retail rate. FERC said those choices belong to states. It wrote that states have “a crucial role to play” in designating which retail customers must be curtailed.

The shortfall that drove the filing has not moved. The PJM 2028/2029 Base Residual Auction procured 138,318 MW and came in 6,831 MW short of the reliability requirement. Jefferies analysts told clients that the ruling could keep PJM capacity prices higher for longer. They named Constellation, NRG, Talen and Vistra as likely winners. They expect any revival of the idea to come from states, and they named Ohio and Pennsylvania.

What Rosner Added

Commissioner David Rosner concurred. He criticized the PJM plan to leave IRAS loads out of the capacity auction demand curve. He warned that the auction could then signal surplus capacity while the region sheds load involuntarily. He called that “economically inefficient.” He agreed that non-critical data centers should go offline before homes, hospitals and schools in an emergency. He said curtailment should come only “after voluntary demand response resources have been exhausted.” States should set the priority order.

What Comes Next

No refile deadline appears in the coverage MGRID reviewed. Energy analyst Rao Konidena reads the order as an invitation to an optional new Section 205 filing. He also reports that FERC found the PJM plan to lock in capacity accreditation values unsupported. PJM spokesman Jeffrey Shields said PJM is reviewing the order with “an eye toward how we can fulfill FERC’s requirements.” About five weeks earlier, FERC rejected key parts of the PJM backstop procurement auction. MGRID did not read the order itself. The holdings above come from the trade press and one analyst’s reading of the order text.

Sources

• Utility Dive, FERC rejects most of PJM’s large load interconnection plan, October 12, 2026
• Rao Konidena, FERC’s rejection of PJM’s IRAS proposal requires a second glance, October 12, 2026
• Magica, PJM’s Proposed IRAS Rules for New Data-Center Loads (filing summary, docket ER26-3515-000), accessed October 12, 2026