{"document":{"slug":"filing-20260728-5071","title":"Motion for Abeyance of the Indicated PJM Transmission Owners and Request for Expedited Action and Shortened Comment Period","issued":"2026-07-28","accession":"20260728-5071","docket":"EL26-67-000","group":"PJM filings","filer":"Indicated PJM Transmission Owners","kind":"motion","file":"sources/originals/20260728-5071_01.pdf","url":"https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession_Number=20260728-5071","sha256":"68099cdc9e5ad5b8e9cadb97303e90f5b673ac4f50f4e713f950fd05c5f9ef72","pages":12,"tokens":3326,"emptyPages":[]},"pages":[{"page":1,"startToken":0,"endToken":424,"text":"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA \nBEFORE THE \nFEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION \nPJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al.   \n)  \nDocket No. EL26-67-000\nMOTION FOR ABEYANCE OF THE INDICATED PJM TRANSMISSION OWNERS \nAND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED ACTION  \nAND SHORTENED COMMENT PERIOD \nPursuant to Rule 212 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy \nRegulatory Commission’s (“Commission” or “FERC”),1 the Indicated PJM Transmission Owners \n(“PJM Transmission Owners”)2 respectfully move to hold the deadline to respond in the above-\ncaptioned proceeding in abeyance for 90 days, until November 16, 2026.3  Good cause exists to \ngrant this motion because doing so will provide the PJM Transmission Owners adequate time to \ndetermine the appropriate additions and revisions to the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff \n(“PJM Tariff”) and submit one or more filings pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act \n1\n18 C.F.R. § 385.212 (2025). \n2\nThe Indicated PJM Transmission Owners are:  American Electric Power Service Corporation on behalf of its \naffiliates, Appalachian Power Company, Indiana Michigan Power Company, Kentucky Power Company, Kingsport \nPower Company, Ohio Power Company, Wheeling Power Company, AEP Appalachian Transmission Company, Inc., \nAEP Indiana Michigan Transmission Company, Inc., AEP Kentucky Transmission Company, Inc., AEP Ohio \nTransmission Company, Inc., and AEP West Virginia Transmission Company, Inc.; The Dayton Power and Light \nCompany d/b/a AES Ohio; Dominion Energy Services, Inc. on behalf of Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a \nDominion Energy Virginia; Duke Energy Business Services, LLC for Duke Energy Kentucky, Inc. and Duke Energy \nOhio, Inc.; Duquesne Light Company; East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc.; Exelon Corporation on behalf of its \naffiliates Atlantic City Electric Company, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, Commonwealth Edison Company, \nCommonwealth Edison Company of Indiana, Inc., Delmarva Power & Light Company, PECO Energy Company, and \nPotomac Electric Power Company; FirstEnergy Service Company, on behalf of its affiliates American Transmission \nSystems, Incorporated, Jersey Central Power & Light Company, Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission LLC, The \nPotomac Edison Company, Monongahela Power Company, Keystone Appalachian Transmission Company, and \nTrans-Allegheny Interstate Line Company (collectively, the “FirstEnergy Companies”); PPL Electric Utilities \nCorporation; Public Service Electric and Gas Company; Rockland Electric Company; and the Southern Maryland \nElectric Cooperative. \n3\nSee PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al., 195 FERC ¶ 61,211, at 39 & n.111 (2026) (explaining that the \nCommission will consider requests for full or partial abeyance of up to 90 days, including requests to hold in abeyance \nthe deadline to respond) (“Show Cause Order”).  November 16 is the first business day after the end of the 90-day \nabeyance period."},{"page":2,"startToken":424,"endToken":698,"text":"2 \n(“FPA”) in response to the Commission’s Show Cause Order.  The PJM Transmission Owners \nfurther request a shortened comment period of five (5) days to facilitate the Commission issuing \nan order granting the motion to hold the deadline to respond in abeyance no later than August 10, \n2026.   \nI.\nBACKGROUND \nOn June 18, 2026, the Commission issued a show cause order under section 206 of the FPA \nto PJM, together with its transmission owners, directing PJM and the PJM Transmission Owners \nto justify or reform the tariff provisions governing how large loads connect to and receive service \nfrom the transmission system.4\nThe Show Cause Order preliminarily found that the PJM Tariff appeared to be unjust, \nunreasonable, or unduly discriminatory or preferential because of a lack of sufficiently clear and \nconsistent provisions to address service for large loads and related configurations.5 The \nCommission therefore directed PJM and its transmission owners, within 60 days, to show cause \nwhy the PJM Tariff remains just and reasonable without provisions addressing:  (1) the application \nprocess, study procedures, and ongoing operational requirements for Eligible Customers seeking \ntransmission service on behalf of large loads; (2) additional transparency concerning Network \nUpgrade costs for such service, together with the absence of a pro forma cost recovery agreement \nand a mechanism to ensure related payments are properly credited to transmission owners’ revenue \nrequirements; (3) transmission service options tailored to flexible large loads willing and able to \nlimit their use of the transmission system under certain conditions; and (4) rates, terms, and \nconditions applicable to interconnection customers serving “electrically proximate large load” or \n4\nShow Cause Order at PP 3, 35. \n5\nId."},{"page":3,"startToken":698,"endToken":1004,"text":"3 \nco-located load.6  The Commission directed PJM either to justify the absence of such provisions \nor to propose PJM Tariff revisions addressing those concerns.7\nThe Show Cause Order indicated that the Commission would consider requests from PJM \nand/or transmission owners to hold all or certain aspects of the FPA section 206 proceeding in \nabeyance, for up to 90 days, including the August 17, 2026, deadline to respond.8  The Commission \nexplained that the purpose of such an abeyance would be to provide PJM and the PJM \nTransmission Owners time while they work through the stakeholder process to develop FPA \nsection 205 filings to revise the PJM Tariff to address the issues raised in the Show Cause Order.9\nII.\nMOTION TO HOLD DEADLINE TO RESPOND IN ABEYANCE \nConsistent with the Commission’s directives in the Show Cause Order,10 the PJM \nTransmission Owners respectfully request that the Commission hold the deadline to respond in \nthis proceeding in abeyance for a 90-day period, until November 16, 2026.  Good cause exists to \ngrant this motion because doing so will allow the PJM Transmission Owners to address, through \none or more FPA section 205 filings, the issues identified by the Commission in the Show Cause \nOrder.  The PJM Transmission Owners anticipate that the FPA section 205 filings submitted by \nPJM and the PJM Transmission Owners will address the issues identified by the Commission in \nthe Show Cause Order.  The PJM Transmission Owners will submit their FPA section 205 filing(s) \n6\nId. \n7\nId. \n8\nId. at P 39.  Because 60 days from issuance of the Show Cause Order falls on a Saturday, the deadline to \nrespond does not end until the close of business on Monday, August 17.  See 18 C.F.R. § 385.2007(a)(2). \n9\nShow Cause Order at P 39. \n10\nId."},{"page":4,"startToken":1004,"endToken":1382,"text":"4 \nby no later than November 16, 2026, which is the date 90 days after the deadline to respond to the \nShow Cause Order.11\nAs the Commission has recognized, the PJM Transmission Owners have exclusive and \nunilateral rights regarding regional rates and rate design under the PJM Tariff and the cost  \nallocation provisions of Schedule 12 of the PJM Tariff.12  Consistent with this obligation, the PJM \nTransmission Owners anticipate that their FPA section 205 filing(s) will contain a pro forma cost \nrecovery agreement(s), as well as rates for new transmission services for “flexible large loads” and \n“electrically proximate large loads or co-located loads.”  The PJM Transmission Owners’ filing(s) \nwould include any financial penalties applied to customers that fail to meet their contractual service \nlimits with respect to any new transmission services.  The PJM Transmission Owners are also \nconsidering whether the transparency findings in the Show Cause Order may require modifications \nto the PJM Transmission Owners’ local planning procedures, such as Attachment M-3 to the PJM \nTariff.  These items are discussed in greater detail below.   \nThe PJM Transmission Owners have already begun these efforts in earnest, but a 90-day \nabeyance is necessary to allow the PJM Transmission Owners sufficient time not only to develop \nthese PJM Tariff provisions, but to also provide PJM and PJM stakeholders an adequate \nopportunity to review these provisions, and for the PJM Transmission Owners to consider any \n11\nSee id. (“The Commission will consider requests from PJM and/or the Transmission Owners to hold, for up \nto 90 days, all or certain aspects of this FPA section 206 proceeding in abeyance, including the deadline to respond \nto this order.”) (emphasis added). \n12\nSee Pa.-N.J.-Md. Interconnection, 105 FERC ¶ 61,294 (2003), order on compliance, 108 FERC ¶ 61,033 \n(2004) (approving Settlement Agreement, Docket Nos. OA97-261-006, et al. (filed Oct. 3, 2003), as modified, \nModification of Settlement Agreement, Docket Nos. OA97-261-009, et al., §§ 3.2, 4.2(B); 4.3, 4.5 (filed Jan. 20, 2004 \nand corrected Jan. 23, 2004)).  The Settlement Agreement is incorporated into PJM OATT, § 9 and the Consolidated \nTransmission Owners Agreement (“CTOA”) at § 7.3.1, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Rate Schedules, TOA, TOA-42 \nRate Schedule FERC No. 42 (1.0.0)."},{"page":5,"startToken":1382,"endToken":1657,"text":"5 \nfeedback received.13  Moreover, the PJM Transmission Owners will be actively working with PJM \nduring this time on the development of non-rate terms and conditions of the new services and \nprocesses addressed in the Show Cause Order.      \nA.\nDevelopment of a Pro Forma Cost Recovery Agreement \nIn the Show Cause Order, the Commission preliminarily found that PJM’s Tariff appears \nto be unjust and unreasonable because it lacks adequate mechanisms to mitigate the risk of cost \nshifting among transmission customers.14  The Commission indicated it was concerned about the \napparent lack of a pro forma cost recovery agreement to help ensure that Eligible Customers taking \ntransmission service on behalf of large loads bear the risk and are ultimately responsible for costs \nincurred to provide transmission service, including the cost of Network Upgrades.15 The \nCommission noted that such an agreement would require “the Eligible Customer to make a \nminimum contribution toward the transmission owner’s transmission revenue requirement, if the \nEligible Customer ultimately takes less transmission service than anticipated because the large \nload does not materialize as planned or is not developed at all.”16  The Commission stated its \nfinding is not intended to alter or call into question existing regional cost allocation methods for \nNetwork Upgrades, but instead is focused on helping to prevent cost shifting among transmission \ncustomers.17\n13\nThe PJM Transmission Owners have a contractual obligation to engage in coordination and consultation with \nPJM and the PJM Members Committee with respect to changes to the PJM Tariff.  See CTOA at § 7.5.1. \n14\nShow Cause Order at P 66. \n15\nId. at P 66. \n16\nId. at P 81.  \n17\nId."},{"page":6,"startToken":1657,"endToken":2017,"text":"6 \nAs explained in their comments in the ANOPR proceeding,18 and acknowledged by the \nCommission in the Show Cause Order,19 a number of PJM Transmission Owners have already \nbeen active in developing bilateral retail and FERC-jurisdictional agreements with large load \ncustomers that include protections against cost shifting.20  Nevertheless, the PJM Transmission \nOwners acknowledge and appreciate the concerns raised by the Commission in the Show Cause \nOrder regarding the need to ensure that costs are not inappropriately shifted from large load \ncustomers to other transmission customers.  To that end, the PJM Transmission Owners intend to \ndevelop and file a agreement or agreements to mitigate the risk of cost shifting among transmission \ncustomers and ensure eligible large load customers pay their share of system upgrades.  As the \nShow Cause Order recognizes, however, this involves working through and resolving a number of \nimportant issues, such as the interaction with and potential overlap between a pro forma cost \nrecovery agreement and bilateral cost recovery agreements between utilities and retail customers, \nas well as the specific mechanism for determining each Eligible Customer’s required minimum \ncontribution.  The PJM Transmission Owners are also considering the extent to which changes \nwill be needed to each transmission owner’s individual transmission rates and/or other tariff \nprovisions, such as the formula rates set forth in Attachment H to the PJM Tariff.  \n18\nSee Interconnection of Large Loads to the Interstate Transmission System, Advance Notice of Proposed \nRulemaking, Docket No. RM26-4-000 (dated Oct. 23, 2025) (“ANOPR”); see also Letter from Chris Wright, Sec’y, \nU.S. Dep’t of Energy, Docket No. RM26-4-000 (dated Oct. 23, 2025). \n19\nShow Cause Order at P 82 & n.159. \n20\nSee e.g., PECO Energy Co., 195 FERC ¶ 61,074 (2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,181 \n(2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,183 (2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,184 \n(2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,185 (2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,106 \n(2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,109 (2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,110 \n(2026); Commonwealth Edison Co., 194 FERC ¶ 61,113 (2026); PECO Energy Co., 193 FERC ¶ 61,148 (2025)."},{"page":7,"startToken":2017,"endToken":2330,"text":"7 \nB.\nRate Design Related to Transmission Services for Large Loads \nIn the Show Cause Order, the Commission preliminarily found that the PJM Tariff appears \nto be unjust and unreasonable because it does not include transmission services that reflect Eligible \nCustomers taking transmission service on behalf of “flexible large loads” that are willing and able \nto limit their use of the transmission system under certain conditions.21 The Commission \npreliminarily found that new transmission services should be available to “flexible large loads”  \nwilling and able to limit their withdrawals, specifically the three new services it required for co-\nlocated loads:  (1) Interim Network Integration Transmission Service, (2) Firm Contract Demand, \nand (3) Non-Firm Contract Demand.22  The Commission also preliminarily found that the PJM \nTariff appears to be unjust and unreasonable because it does not contain provisions allowing a \ngenerator interconnection customer to seek interconnection service(s) that reflect the operational \ndynamics of serving either:  (1) an “electrically proximate large load,” or (2) a co-located load.23\nBecause the PJM Transmission Owners have the FPA section 205 filing rights with respect \nto regional rates and rate design under the PJM Tariff, the PJM Transmission Owners’ section 205 \nfiling(s) made in response to the Show Cause Order will include the rate-related provisions for any \nnew transmission services that PJM offers to “flexible large load,” as well as any services \napplicable to “electrically proximate large load.”  The PJM Transmission Owners will also work \nto coordinate any proposal with the rate design proposals at issue in the PJM Co-Located Load \nproceeding24 for these new services, subject to the Commission’s directives on compliance set \n21\nShow Cause Order at P 86. \n22\nId. \n23\nId. at P 95. \n24\nSee, e.g., Initial Brief and Joint Responses of the Indicated PJM Transmission Owners to Paper Hearing \nQuestions, Docket Nos. EL25-49-000, et al. (filed Feb. 23, 2026)."},{"page":8,"startToken":2330,"endToken":2633,"text":"8 \nforth in its June 18, 2026, order in that proceeding.25  However, even assuming this is the case, the \nPJM Transmission Owners will need sufficient time to carefully consider, in coordination with \nPJM and other interested stakeholders, what additions and modifications are necessary to adapt \nthose rate proposals to new services available to Eligible Customers taking transmissions service \non behalf of “flexible large loads” and/or “electrically proximate large loads.”   \nIn addition to the rates for new transmission services applicable to large loads, the PJM \nTransmission Owners will also be considering whether to propose financial penalties applicable \nto customers taking one or more of the new transmission services that fail to comply with their \ncontractual withdrawal limits.  Again, the PJM Transmission Owners anticipate that they will be \nable to utilize much of the work done to develop the financial penalty proposal they filed in the \nPJM Co-Located Load proceeding, but similarly will need to work through the details of how that \nproposal will apply to other types of large load customers.  \nC.\nTransparency Obligations Related to Network Upgrades Needed for Large \nLoad Customers \nIn the Show Cause Order, the Commission preliminarily found that the PJM Tariff appears \nto be unjust and unreasonable because it does not contain provisions requiring the provision of \ndata on PJM’s website: \nin a single location, and in an easily accessible format that is searchable and allows \nusers to filter the data, on transmission service requested by Eligible Customers on \nbehalf of large loads, for Network Upgrades evaluated in the local transmission \nplanning process that are needed to provide transmission service to Eligible \nCustomers on behalf of those large loads, and the costs for those Network \nUpgrades.26\n25\nPJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al., 195 FERC ¶ 61,209 (2026). \n26\nShow Cause Order at P 71."},{"page":9,"startToken":2633,"endToken":2907,"text":"9 \nThe Commission preliminarily found cost transparency measures are needed to provide \nstakeholders with sufficient information and visibility regarding the Network Upgrades, and their \nassociated costs, needed to provide transmission service to Eligible Customers on behalf of large \nloads.27\nThere are two workstreams here relevant to the PJM Transmission Owners.  First, the PJM \nTransmission Owners will be working closely with PJM to develop appropriate provisions to \nprovide the level of transparency anticipated in the Show Cause Order.  The PJM Transmission \nOwners’ role here is key because they will be designing, developing, and constructing many of the \nNetwork Upgrades necessary to accommodate the interconnection of new large loads to the \ntransmission system.  This effort will involve working through a number of important issues, \nincluding ensuring appropriate confidentiality protections, compliance with anti-trust laws, and \nupdating, where applicable, websites and databases to house such information.28\nSecond, the PJM Transmission Owners are considering what, if any, PJM Tariff \nmodifications they will need to include in their own FPA section 205 filing(s) relating to \ntransparency enhancements.  Under the CTOA, the PJM Transmission Owners retain their rights \nwith respect to local transmission planning matters.29  If the PJM Transmission Owners determine \nthat revisions to the PJM Tariff are needed with respect to local planning matters, such as the \nprovisions of PJM Attachment M-3, the PJM Transmission Owners will include such provisions \nin their FPA section 205 filing(s) made in response to the Show Cause Order. \n27\nId. \n28\nSee, e.g., PJM, Project Status & Cost Allocation, https://www.pjm.com/planning/m/project-construction (last \nvisited July 28, 2026). \n29\nSee CTOA at §§ 5.2, 5.6."},{"page":10,"startToken":2907,"endToken":3137,"text":"10 \nIII.\nREQUEST FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION AND SHORTENED \nCOMMENT PERIOD \nThe PJM Transmission Owners respectfully request expedited consideration of this motion \nfor abeyance and request that the Commission issue an order granting the motion no later than \nAugust 10, 2026.  Expedited consideration and the issuance of order by that date will provide the \nPJM Transmission Owners sufficient assurance that they will have adequate time to develop and \nsubmit one or more FPA section 205 filings necessary to implement the rates, terms, and conditions \nnecessary to address the Show Cause Order, as discussed above.  Expedited consideration will also \nallow the PJM Transmission Owners to focus their efforts on developing their FPA section 205 \nfiling(s) rather than spending critical time preparing separate responses to the Show Cause Order.  \nConsistent with this request, the PJM Transmission Owners also seek a shortened comment period \non this motion for abeyance.  Specifically, the PJM Transmission Owners request that the \nCommission establish a comment period of five (5) days.  Good cause exists to grant a shortened \ncomment period for the reasons set forth above.  Moreover, no party will be prejudiced as a result \nof granting a five (5) day comment period, as the additional time and certainty afforded by an \nexpedited order will accrue to the benefit of stakeholders by providing the PJM Transmission \nOwners sufficient time to solicit and consider stakeholder feedback on their proposals."},{"page":11,"startToken":3137,"endToken":3247,"text":"11 \nIV.\nCONCLUSION \nFor the reasons set forth above, the PJM Transmission Owners’ request that the \nCommission establish a five (5) day comment period for answers to this motion and issue, on or \nbefore August 10, 2026, an order granting the PJM Transmission Owners’ request to hold the \ndeadline to respond in this proceeding in abeyance for 90 days, until November 16, 2026. \nRespectfully submitted, \n/s/ Michael Kunselman \nMichael Kunselman  \nRichard P. Sparling \n \nNicholas J. Cicale \nJonathan A. Namazi \nDavis Wright Tremaine LLP \n1301 K Street NW \nSuite 500 East \nWashington, DC 20005 \nCounsel for the FirstEnergy\n  Companies \nOn behalf of the Indicated PJM   \n  Transmission Owners\nDated:  July 28, 2026"},{"page":12,"startToken":3247,"endToken":3326,"text":"CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE \nUnder Rule 2010 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. § \n385.2010 (2025), I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document upon each \nperson designated on the official service list compiled by the Secretary in this proceeding.  \nDated at Washington, D.C., this 28th day of July 2026.  \n/s/ Daniel Klein\nDaniel Klein  \nDavis Wright Tremaine LLP  \n1301 K Street NW  \nSuite 500 East  \nWashington, DC 20005"}],"sections":[{"p":1,"at":0,"title":"Opening text","method":"opening text","endPage":2,"endAt":297,"startToken":0,"endToken":472},{"p":2,"at":297,"title":"I. BACKGROUND","method":"printed heading","endPage":2,"endAt":300,"startToken":472,"endToken":473},{"p":2,"at":300,"title":"BACKGROUND","method":"printed heading","endPage":3,"endAt":716,"startToken":473,"endToken":819},{"p":3,"at":716,"title":"II. MOTION TO HOLD DEADLINE TO RESPOND IN ABEYANCE","method":"printed heading","endPage":5,"endAt":243,"startToken":819,"endToken":1420},{"p":5,"at":243,"title":"A. Development of a Pro Forma Cost Recovery Agreement","method":"printed heading","endPage":7,"endAt":3,"startToken":1420,"endToken":2018},{"p":7,"at":3,"title":"B. Rate Design Related to Transmission Services for Large Loads","method":"printed heading","endPage":8,"endAt":1119,"startToken":2018,"endToken":2502},{"p":8,"at":1119,"title":"C. Transparency Obligations Related to Network Upgrades Needed for Large","method":"printed heading","endPage":10,"endAt":4,"startToken":2502,"endToken":2908},{"p":10,"at":4,"title":"III. REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION AND SHORTENED","method":"printed heading","endPage":11,"endAt":4,"startToken":2908,"endToken":3138},{"p":11,"at":4,"title":"IV. CONCLUSION","method":"printed heading","endPage":11,"endAt":8,"startToken":3138,"endToken":3139},{"p":11,"at":8,"title":"CONCLUSION","method":"printed heading","endPage":12,"endAt":0,"startToken":3139,"endToken":3247},{"p":12,"at":0,"title":"CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE","method":"printed heading","endPage":12,"endAt":470,"startToken":3247,"endToken":3326}]}