Several states introduced bills this legislative session to require more transparency behind how utilities cast their PJM votes. Some bills passed, others failed, while the rest reside in limbo.
Lawmakers across several states introduced bills this legislative session seeking to require utilities to reveal their PJM votes.
The bills seek to bring more transparency to the grid operator, which has a direct impact on the consumer cost of electricity and states’ ability to implement clean energy goals. As the largest power grid operator in the United States, PJM serves 65 million customers between Chicago and New Jersey.
A report from Grid Strategies and Advanced Energy United found that the PJM grid operator’s “very slow” pace of interconnecting new generating capacity in recent years will cost consumers “as much as $7 billion” in the coming year, due to higher prices in PJM’s latest capacity auction.
(See also: Energy storage opportunities in Mid-Atlantic region await clear state policies)
Delaware
Sen. Stephanie Hansen (D) introduced SB 61 this legislative session after a similar bill previously failed to pass. After the bill was unanimously passed in the Senate, it was assigned to the Natural Resources & Energy Committee in the House on Mar. 25.
The bill requires the disclosure of votes cast at meetings of, or matters before, the PJM Interconnection Regional Transmission Organization.
Illinois
Introduced by Rep. Joyce Mason (D), HB 1802 would require Illinois utilities to submit a report to state regulators revealing the votes they cast at grid operator meetings. The utilities would also have to explain how those votes are in the public interest. The legislation would cover ComEd, Ameren Illinois and MidAmerican Energy.
Ameren and MidAmerican Energy are also part of the MISO grid, which considers all votes to be a matter of public record, with the exception of the selection or removal of committee chairs and vice chairs. However, according to consumer advocacy group Citizens Utility Board, the bill would also improve access to information in MISO because “you shouldn’t have to be an expert to find voting data.”
Last year, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission made a ruling requiring transmission operators to take into account a number of factors when planning, including state laws, utility integrated resource plans, locations of expected power generation retirement, locations of expected power generation connections and trends in fuel costs. The move was highly controversial because, according to Citizens Utility Board, PJM requested a rehearing and tried to get approval for a behind-closed-doors deal it made with transmission owners that the Citizens Utility Board said would have undermined the ruling.
“When utilities vote at regional transmission organizations, they have impacts on our clean energy transition and the cost of electricity,” said Rep. Mason, when the idea was first proposed in Illinois last year. “My bill introduces better transparency for how utilities vote in our electric markets, which is part of a healthy democracy. As a legislator, my votes are public – it should be the same for utilities whose votes impact the affordability and cleanliness of our electricity.”
The possibility for increased transparency comes to a state that is still undergoing a corruption scandal between ComEd, the state’s largest utility, and its lawmakers. The corruption charges resulted after the state’s lawmakers enacted legislation favorable to ComEd in exchange for payments and “do nothing” jobs. Though former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan currently awaiting prison sentencing for the corruption charges and ComEd was forced to refund its customers for the nearly decade-long bribery scheme that resulted in higher electric rates, public trust in its lawmakers and utilities has yet to return for many of the state’s residents.
Maryland
Maryland passed a bill that requires utilities to disclose their votes at PJM. The legislation requires electric companies, with the exception of municipal electric utilities, to submit a report to the Public Service Commission regarding each recorded vote cast by the electric company and any of its state affiliates at a meeting of a regional transmission organization.
The bill was initially introduced during Maryland’s 2024 session, but ultimately failed. Provided that the governor does not veto the bill, the new law will go into effect Oct. 1, 2025.
West Virginia
West Virginia’s legislation is not specific to transparency around PJM’s operations, but it notably reflects a possible growing frustration mounting within the state.
West Virginia’s House passed a concurrent resolution, HCR 103, April 11 requesting the Joint Committee on Government and Finance study West Virginia’s participation and affiliation with PJM. The House of Delegates ordered that the committee conduct a comprehensive study to:
- evaluate PJM’s management and role in the wholesale electric power market;
- determine whether West Virginia and its rate payers are well served by continued participation in the PJM market;
- determine whether or not West Virginia has adequate representation in the governance and decision-making of the PJM Interconnection;
- determine whether West Virginian ratepayer’s investments in electricity generation capacity are being adequately valued by the PJM Interconnection wholesale markets;
- determine whether other regional transmission organizations are available and better suited to serve West Virginia and its ratepayers; and
- determine whether it is feasible and advantageous for West Virginia to form its own regional transmission organization similar to the State of Texas.
The committee will report its findings, recommendations and any drafted legislation it proposes during next year’s legislative session.
Virginia
Virginia’s bill failed early on. The bill would have required transparency for how utilities cast their votes, along with a brief description of how each vote cast by the utility or its affiliate is in the public interest. The bill was introduced by Del. Amy Laufer (D).
