EL26-67-000 · 2026-11-05 · US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Rep. Victoria Spartz asks FERC and DOE to condition approvals and protect ratepayers

November 5, 2026 
 
The Honorable Laura V. Swett 
Chairman 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
888 First Street NE 
Washington, DC 20426 
 
The Honorable Chris Wright 
Secretary of Energy 
U.S. Department of Energy 
1000 Independence Avenue SW 
Washington, DC 20585 
 
RE: Urgent Request for Federal Action on Large-Load Projects, Grid Reliability, 
Transmission Competition, Ratepayer Protections, Transparency, and Regulatory 
Accountability 
 
Dear Chairman Swett and Secretary Wright: 
 
At numerous town halls throughout Indiana’s 5th Congressional District, my constituents have 
expressed serious frustration about massive data centers, the proposed Greentown–Ohio 765-kV 
transmission line, rising electricity costs, threats to private property, productive farmland, and 
critical water resources. 
 
These concerns raise fundamental questions about the transparency, reliability, fairness, and 
accountability of America’s electricity infrastructure planning. 
 
Large private developments can trigger billions of dollars in generation, transmission, and related 
infrastructure investments. Yet the public often cannot determine who requested the capacity, 
who approved the investments, who benefits financially, and who ultimately pays. 
 
Transparency must be a fundamental requirement—not an afterthought. The public 
deserves to know whether these projects serve genuine public needs or primarily private 
commercial interests, who benefits, who pays, and what enforceable guardrails protect 
consumers and property owners. 
 
Recent FERC proceedings, DOE emergency reliability orders, and NERC assessments 
demonstrate the need for coordinated federal oversight and corrective action. 
 
I urge FERC and DOE to address the following issues within their respective statutory 
authorities and identify where additional congressional legislation is necessary. 
 
By Adrienne Milow at 1:33 pm, Nov 06, 2026

1. Moratorium on New and Pending Large-Load Projects 
 
Identify and exercise available federal authority to suspend or condition discretionary approvals 
affecting new and pending major data centers, cryptocurrency mining operations, and associated 
infrastructure until essential reliability, cost-allocation, transparency, and financial safeguards are 
established. 
 
Where existing authority is insufficient, recommend legislation. Respect vested rights, 
enforceable agreements, and essential reliability or safety improvements. 
 
2. National Inventory of Large Loads and Transparency 
 
Establish a transparent national accounting of proposed and existing major electricity loads, 
identifying developers, beneficial owners, affiliates, verified demand, financial commitments, 
required generation and transmission, public subsidies, and potential stranded costs. 
 
Require disclosure of material infrastructure commitments, approval decisions, cost-allocation 
arrangements, and project beneficiaries, subject to legitimate security and confidentiality 
protections. 
 
Examine speculative and duplicated load requests and the mismatch between rapid data-center 
development and the much longer timelines required for new generation and transmission 
infrastructure. 
 
3. Nationwide Grid Reliability, Indiana Coal Retirements, and Replacement Generation 
 
Conduct a comprehensive national assessment of existing and planned generation capacity, 
transmission infrastructure, projected large-load growth, planned plant retirements, and regional 
grid reliability. 
 
Determine what new generation and transmission are actually being built, their expected 
completion dates, fuel availability, and whether sufficient dependable capacity will be available 
to meet rapidly increasing electricity demand. 
 
NERC’s long-term reliability assessments identify growing resource adequacy risks as data 
centers and other large loads expand faster than generation and transmission infrastructure. Its 
2026 Level 3 Alert also identifies operational risks from sudden large-load fluctuations. 
 
Assess the potential for capacity shortages, voltage and frequency instability, emergency 
load shedding, rolling blackouts, and widespread outages if large-load growth exceeds 
available generation and transmission capacity. 
 
Specifically review: 
 
a. Nationwide generation and transmission construction schedules, including project 
delays, interconnection backlogs, and equipment shortages.

b. Regional electricity supply margins and the effects of simultaneous large-load 
additions. 
c. DOE’s emergency orders involving R.M. Schahfer Units 17 and 18 and F.B. Culley 
Unit 2 in Indiana. 
d. Rockport Unit 1’s planned 2028 retirement and the availability of dependable 
replacement generation. 
e. PJM and MISO capacity forecasts, interconnection delays, and reliability concerns 
affecting Indiana. 
 
Develop a concrete, independently verified national and regional roadmap to provide reliable 
natural gas and nuclear generation, including permitting, financing, fuel supply, equipment 
procurement, interconnection, and construction schedules. 
 
Evaluate opportunities to replace retiring coal plants with nuclear power, including small 
modular reactors, and reuse existing power-plant sites and transmission infrastructure. 
 
Identify enforceable milestones to ensure reliable replacement capacity is available before plant 
retirements or large-load additions create unacceptable reliability risks. 
 
4. Full System Costs of Solar Generation and Battery Storage 
 
Independently evaluate the full system costs and reliability impacts of solar generation, battery 
storage, backup generation, dispatchable capacity, transmission upgrades, and peak-demand 
requirements. 
 
Assess the true economic and environmental costs of utility-scale battery storage, including 
manufacturing and mineral supply chains, fire and thermal-runaway hazards, hazardous 
materials, disposal, recycling, environmental remediation, replacement costs, and 
decommissioning. 
 
Determine whether the costs of intermittency, backup capacity, storage, reliability services, and 
environmental safeguards are fully disclosed and properly allocated. 
 
5. Transmission Necessity, Competition, and Eminent Domain 
 
Review the proposed Greentown–Ohio 765-kV transmission line and other major projects for 
genuine public necessity, verified demand, beneficiaries, route alternatives, competitive 
selection, and cost allocation. 
 
Evaluate existing corridors, reconductoring, grid-enhancing technologies, and local generation. 
 
Examine whether federal transmission policies and state right-of-first-refusal laws unnecessarily 
restrict competition. 
 
Assess adverse effects on neighboring landowners, long-term property values, and the treatment 
of income-producing properties in applicable condemnation proceedings.

Eminent domain must serve genuine public necessity—not primarily private commercial 
interests. 
 
6. Require Developers to Pay Full Generation and Transmission Costs 
 
Ensure major large-load developers bear all properly attributable incremental costs of generation 
capacity, transmission lines, substations, interconnection, system upgrades, and related 
infrastructure. 
 
Review deposits, financial guarantees, minimum-payment obligations, termination fees, and 
protections against stranded costs. 
 
Examine previous cryptocurrency mining developments in Marion and near Merom to 
determine the adequacy of developer payments for generation capacity, transmission 
infrastructure, system upgrades, and other costs, including whether any costs were 
improperly shifted to existing ratepayers. 
 
Existing ratepayers must not subsidize generation or transmission infrastructure required 
primarily for private commercial developments. 
 
7. Corporate Subsidies and Preferential Government Treatment 
 
Review federal tax incentives, grants, loans, research-and-development credits, and other 
benefits provided to major electricity-intensive developments. 
 
Coordinate with appropriate federal agencies to identify overlapping federal, state, and local 
subsidies and evaluate their economic justification. 
 
8. Independently Verify Community Economic Benefits 
 
Require independent assessment of permanent employment, net tax revenues, infrastructure 
costs, water consumption, land impacts, and actual public benefits. 
 
Distinguish temporary construction activity and announced investment from lasting economic 
gains. 
 
9. Protect Small Businesses and Fair Competition 
 
Examine whether preferential utility arrangements, public subsidies, and infrastructure 
commitments increase costs or limit electricity availability for existing businesses. 
 
Ensure federal policies do not unfairly disadvantage smaller competitors.

10. Close Project-Splitting and Transparency Loopholes 
 
Investigate whether developers and utilities can avoid meaningful oversight through affiliated 
entities, phased applications, fragmented permits, confidential agreements, or project 
classifications. 
 
Require consolidated assessment of related developments and disclosure of material financial 
commitments, beneficiaries, and regulatory decisions. 
 
11. Investigate PJM and MISO Governance, Regulatory Failures, and National Security 
Concerns 
 
Independently examine PJM and MISO governance structures, including board selection and 
removal, director qualifications, conflicts of interest, utility influence, stakeholder participation, 
transparency, regulatory compliance, and Federal Power Act Section 205 filing rights. 
 
Recent FERC proceedings have raised serious questions about PJM’s regulatory framework and 
ability to respond effectively to rapidly growing electricity demand. 
 
The investigation should address: 
 
a. FERC Docket EL26-67-000: Preliminary findings concerning potentially unjust, 
unreasonable, or discriminatory large-load interconnection rules. 
b. FERC Docket ER24-2045: Repeated compliance orders requiring further corrective 
filings. 
c. FERC Docket EL25-49: Co-located loads, transmission service, and cost-allocation 
concerns. 
d. FERC Docket AD26-7: PJM governance and stakeholder processes, including the 
need for structural reforms and more effective decision-making. 
 
Concerns have also been brought to my attention regarding China-related connections 
among certain PJM board members. Given the significant national security implications of 
critical grid infrastructure and the regulatory oversight deficiencies identified in recent 
proceedings, these concerns warrant independent examination of PJM’s board selection, 
vetting, disclosure, governance, and oversight procedures. 
 
Review whether board members and senior officials have relevant foreign-government 
affiliations, financial relationships, conflicts of interest, or access to sensitive infrastructure 
information that could present security risks. Any findings must be based on verified evidence 
and applicable legal standards, not nationality or educational background alone. 
 
Determine whether the current governance structure provides sufficient independence, 
transparency, national security protections, and accountability. 
 
Identify substantiated violations, responsible entities, corrective actions, and necessary 
structural and regulatory reforms.

12. Utility Affiliate Conflicts and Cost Overruns 
 
Review utility ownership interests, affiliate transactions, investment returns, procurement, 
project selection, cost overruns, and incentives that may favor unnecessary infrastructure 
expansion. 
 
Require independent examination of major costs, rejected alternatives, and financial benefits to 
utilities and affiliates. 
 
13. National Security and Critical Infrastructure 
 
Review cybersecurity, supply-chain security, foreign ownership and control risks, access to 
sensitive infrastructure, and appropriate vetting of personnel with access to critical systems. 
 
Coordinate with relevant national security authorities and apply consistent, lawful, risk-based 
standards. 
 
14. Presidential Directives and Ratepayer Protections 
 
Evaluate implementation of federal directives concerning data centers, grid reliability, and 
energy infrastructure. 
 
Determine whether voluntary corporate commitments to protect ratepayers are supported by 
enforceable tariffs, contracts, financial guarantees, and independent verification. 
 
15. Prime Farmland, Water Resources, and Battery Storage in Flood Zones 
 
Examine cumulative impacts on productive farmland, water supplies, watersheds, and 
neighboring communities. 
 
Review federal involvement in major publicly financed water infrastructure, including the 
Citizens–Lebanon Water Supply Program, within applicable jurisdiction. 
 
Investigate existing and proposed utility-scale battery storage facilities in flood-prone 
areas, including projects proposed within designated flood zones. 
 
Assess fire hazards, toxic materials, contaminated floodwater and runoff, groundwater 
contamination, emergency-response limitations, and the adequacy of environmental safeguards 
and decommissioning guarantees. 
 
Following Indiana’s devastating August 2026 flooding, determine whether applicable federal 
standards and state coordination adequately protect surrounding communities, farmland, and 
water resources from these risks.

16. Independent GAO Investigation and Congressional Oversight 
 
I intend to seek an independent Government Accountability Office investigation examining: 
 
a. Federal oversight of large-load developments and nationwide grid reliability. 
b. PJM and MISO governance, regulatory compliance, transparency, and security 
safeguards. 
c. Transmission competition and right-of-first-refusal policies. 
d. Federal subsidies and public financial exposure. 
e. Generation adequacy, coal retirements, and natural gas and nuclear replacement 
plans. 
f. Developer responsibility for full generation and transmission costs. 
g. Utility affiliate conflicts and construction cost overruns. 
h. Public financing and infrastructure commitments. 
i. Project splitting, regulatory loopholes, and ratepayer protections. 
j. Battery storage costs, environmental risks, floodplain siting, and necessary legislative 
reforms. 
 
I urge FERC and DOE to cooperate fully with independent congressional oversight. 
 
17. Records Preservation, Independent Audits, and Enforcement 
 
Preserve relevant records concerning major large-load approvals, transmission planning, cost 
allocation, subsidies, utility agreements, governance decisions, and regulatory compliance. 
 
Conduct or facilitate independent reviews within existing authority, refer substantiated 
misconduct to appropriate inspectors general or enforcement authorities, and pursue legally 
available corrective action. 
 
18. Federal Response, Congressional Reporting, and Corrective Action 
 
I request separate written responses from FERC and DOE within 30 days identifying: 
 
a. Actions available under current statutory authority. 
b. Pending proceedings, compliance matters, and regulatory decisions. 
c. Measures to protect grid reliability, competition, transparency, ratepayers, and 
property owners. 
d. Additional authority or legislation needed from Congress. 
 
Within 90 days, I urge FERC and DOE to submit a coordinated report and concrete 
corrective-action plan to the following congressional committees, within their respective 
jurisdictions: 
 
U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 
U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 
U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources.

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 
U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 
 
The report should identify specific regulatory deficiencies, nationwide and regional reliability 
risks, generation and transmission requirements, corrective actions, responsible agencies, 
implementation timelines, enforcement mechanisms, and recommended legislation. 
 
America cannot afford a system where wealthy corporations receive subsidies and special 
treatment, powerful utilities profit from infrastructure expansion, and ordinary Americans 
are left with higher bills, unreliable electricity, and threats to their private property. 
 
Government must protect the public—not serve as a financing mechanism for politically 
connected corporations. Those who benefit must pay. Those who make the decisions must 
be accountable. And the constitutional rights of American property owners must not be 
sacrificed for private profits. 
 
Sincerely, 
 
Victoria Spartz 
Member of Congress 
 
cc: 
 
The Honorable Brett Guthrie, Chair, House Committee on Energy and Commerce 
The Honorable Frank Pallone Jr., Ranking Member, House Committee on Energy and 
Commerce 
The Honorable James Comer, Chair, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 
The Honorable Robert Garcia, Ranking Member, House Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform 
The Honorable Bruce Westerman, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources 
The Honorable Jared Huffman, Ranking Member, House Committee Natural Resources 
The Honorable Mike Lee, Chair, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
The Honorable Martin Heinrich, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources 
The Honorable Rand Raul, Chair, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs 
The Honorable Gary Peters, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs 
The Honorable Orice Williams Brown, Acting Comptroller General of the United States, 
Government Accountability Office 
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General 
North American Electric Reliability Corporation 
PJM Interconnection 
Midcontinent Independent System Operator

Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission 
Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor