PGIQ Rating v2 (reliability-adjusted) · as of June 2026
2

🇺🇸 Northern Virginia (PJM)

Strong, with known trade-offs, and access is getting harder● Under review Reliability flags found
Tier 2 Strong · Composite 51/100, #40 of 79 markets (fundamentals 58 minus a reliability dock) · Outlook Negative · High confidence · how we score

The largest and most proven data-centre market on earth, which is why it holds a strong rating despite a severe connection queue and rising cost. But it is saturated and expensive, and getting in is slow and slowing further. A builder free to go elsewhere may prefer a cheaper, faster market.

See live grid data →
One market,
four reads
BuildTier 2Siting ratingSellGrade BOfftakePlanHeavyLoad pressureMonitorWatchGrid strength
The same market, four decisions. Open any lens to see this market ranked against the rest.
Time to energize · file to power
~72 mo
File a large load today, powered ~2032. Typical range 61 to 83 months, measured.
Application & cluster entry 6mo · System impact / cluster study 36mo · Facilities agreement 12mo · Construction & energization 18mo
End-to-end wait for a large new load, from a complete application being accepted to full firm energization of the nominated MW. Earlier milestones (initial, phased, temporary or conditional energization) are reported separately. A typical case, not a firm quote. · Source: PJM speed-to-power, RMI · Compare markets →
The same market, read four ways

Northern Virginia (PJM) is a moderate market to sell power into

Grade B (Moderate)
Offtake score 59/100
Demand 61, build feasibility 30, combined into the score. For a seller: where buyers already pay, how tight supply is, and how feasible new build is here.
Price to beat
A 100 MW load on our standard case pays about $130/MWh delivered here. A competitive supply offer works against that level.
Forward capacity (firm supply promised for future years) price
$333.44 per MW-day (2027/28 delivery year); forward cost pressure Severe.
Queue depth (generation and storage)
About 144 GW in the interconnection queue (the line to connect to the grid), typical wait 72 months.
For new supply
PJM's reopened first-ready-first-served queue drew about 220 GW in its first cycle (106 GW gas, 67 GW storage), so the build pathway for new supply is genuinely open.
Regulatory momentum
Mixed, worsening. FERC preliminarily found PJM's large-load tariff unjust (Section 206) and a DOE order allows curtailing data centres as a class; co-location and cost-allocation economics are in flux.
Beyond the grid
Community and land-use permitting is now decisive here: after residents raised water, noise and Civil War heritage concerns, courts voided the roughly 2,100-acre Prince William Digital Gateway approvals and the county stopped defending them in 2026, ending what would have been one of the world's largest campuses.
Scheduled to change
Aug 2026: RTO responses to FERC's large-load Section 206 order due (17 Aug 2026) (FERC).
See it on the Offtake Grade →

Northern Virginia (PJM): effectively full at system level, heavy demand pressure

Effectively full 19/100
System-level room, not local capacity
Local capacity at the point of connectionPublished as constrainedcounty and service area, with named dated relief projects · Dominion Energy Virginia

Dominion's contracted capacity pipeline rose from roughly 40 GW in early 2025 to about 47.1 GW by October 2025, pushing connection waits out by years, and a constraint in Loudoun County suppressed new connections outright. Dated relief is under way: the Golden-to-Mars 500 kV loop serves more than 40 new substations, and the Culpeper Technology Zone project adds about 1.2 GW for three of six new AI sites. Dominion publishes no per-substation capacity map for large load.

How to check for your site: Submit through Dominion's Data Center Requests process for a site-specific capacity position. Do NOT read Dominion's Hosting Capacity Tool as load capacity: it models additional generation on distribution feeders.

Source: Data Center Requests, Dominion Energy Virginia. An operator publishing capacity is not the same as us having checked your bus.
Two reads for a grid planner: how much room the system as a whole looks to have (Effectively full), and how hard demand is already pushing (Heavy). The first is a market-level estimate from connection ease, forward adequacy and reliability margin. It is not local deliverability. Local capacity for this market IS addressed below, from an operator publication. Confirm local capacity with the utility before relying on it.
Generation and storage queue
144 GW requested; about 36.0 GW likely to reach operation after historical withdrawal. The gap is speculative pipeline. This counts generation and storage seeking to connect, not load.
Demand growth
Fast load growth in our read, the pull on your system.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: tight for a large new load.
Load Pipeline Reality → Where demand is hungry → Connection friction →

Grid Risk Annex BETA

Watch
Needs structuring or mitigants · grid strength 44/100
A cited, dated grid-risk read on Northern Virginia (PJM) for a capital provider, the banks and private-credit lenders, infrastructure funds and insurers holding or underwriting a power or data-centre exposure here. Drop it into a credit memo and watch each factor over the life of the exposure.
Read it against your asset. For a load asset (Buy), weight connection access and energization timing. For a generation or offtake asset (Sell), weight offtake demand, curtailment (when a plant is told to stop feeding the grid) and cost realisation. For a grid or transmission asset (Move), weight load-pipeline reality and buildout risk.
Rating and track record
PGIQ Tier 2 Strong, outlook Negative, High confidence. Scored on a public, dated, falsifiable record you can cite in a credit memo.
Delivery reliability
Reliability flags found in the bulk and local outage record we reviewed.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: tight.
Cost certainty
Recurring cost about $130/MWh (band $105 to $165) for the standard 100 MW case, basis triangulated. Excludes connection capital.
Regulatory / stroke-of-pen
Mixed, worsening. FERC preliminarily found PJM's large-load tariff unjust (Section 206) and a DOE order allows curtailing data centres as a class; co-location and cost-allocation economics are in flux.
Execution risk
144 GW in the generation and storage queue, about 75% historically withdrawn, the risk the project or load actually energizes on time.
Ongoing monitor
Track this market's rating actions and the Global Power Index as a covenant-style monitor over the life of the exposure.
Monitoring plan
Covenant-style triggers to watch over the life of the exposure: a change in the PGIQ rating or outlook; a dated regulatory move (stroke-of-pen risk); a capacity-auction or cost-band shift; a forward firm-supply adequacy warning; and a rise in queue drop-out or connection friction. Track them on this market page and the Global Power Index, or as Analyst Desk alerts.
Sources: PJM reopened queue · Dominion data-center load, EIA · Virginia Business · Newsweek
This is a directional grid-risk screen, not a credit rating, and not investment, engineering or procurement advice.
The formatted, cited Grid Risk Annex export is an Analyst Desk feature.See the Grid Exposure Monitor →

Regulatory momentum

The regulatory and permitting environment is increasingly the binding variable for a new large load.
Mixed↓ worsening

Why: FERC preliminarily found PJM's large-load tariff unjust (Section 206) and a DOE order allows curtailing data centres as a class; co-location and cost-allocation economics are in flux.

What would change the read: The FERC process settling on workable co-location and cost-allocation rules for large loads.

For new supply: PJM's reopened first-ready-first-served queue drew about 220 GW in its first cycle (106 GW gas, 67 GW storage), so the build pathway for new supply is genuinely open.

Beyond the grid: Community and land-use permitting is now decisive here: after residents raised water, noise and Civil War heritage concerns, courts voided the roughly 2,100-acre Prince William Digital Gateway approvals and the county stopped defending them in 2026, ending what would have been one of the world's largest campuses. Virginia Business Newsweek

The five pillars behind the tier

A
A
C
M
C
The pillar signature: Access, Availability, Cost, Momentum, Carbon, taller is stronger. The same shape repeats across every market so peers compare at a glance.
Access30%42

Access is the binding constraint: a severe PJM interconnection queue, capacity-price spikes, and multi-year waits. Hyperscalers still execute via Dominion (~47 GW contracted pipeline), which earns the override; new greenfield entry is hard.

Availability25%45

Tight availability: load growth of 30+ GW by 2030 is outrunning new supply.

Cost25%70

Cost is rising: Dominion data-center rates and PJM capacity costs are climbing.

Momentum15%92

Unmatched momentum: ~4 GW operational and ~1 GW added a year, the world's #1 market.

Carbon5%58

Carbon moderate (~280 g), gas-led with growing renewables.

Default weights, which lean toward cost and access rather than carbon: Access 30 · Availability 25 · Cost 25 · Momentum 15 · Carbon 5. Momentum reflects the data-center build already underway, not just stated intentions.
Seller view: Read these the other way: momentum is your customer pipeline, cost is your revenue ceiling, and access is how hard it is to build and sell here, not only to connect.

Reliability overlay

Reliability adjustment: the five-pillar score of 58 is reduced to 51, a deduction of 7 points, reflecting the delivery-reliability and firm-supply risks flagged below. Reliability is reported as five separate layers, never as one combined label, because they answer different questions and a strong answer on one does not cover a gap in another: what has actually failed on the bulk system, what a forward assessment expects of firm supply, how the local network performs, what your contract actually promises, and what your site is designed to ride through. Any one of them can cap the tier.

Historical bulk-system performance: Minor flags found

Winter Storm Elliott (Dec 2022) drove nearly 46,000 MW of forced outages in PJM, about 25% of installed capacity, prompting PJM's first conservation call since 2014 and a warning that rotating outages were a real risk.

What this means: A large new load faces occasional exposure here. Monitor conditions and keep a contingency plan.

event-based · PJM Winter Storm Elliott report

Role not yet declared. We have not recorded whether this is one operator’s filing or an average across several, so read it as context until we do. major event days identified by the respondent's own method, not IEEE 1366; comparable within this market, not across standards. It is a territory-wide history and is silent on: performance at a specific substation or feeder; transmission-level service, which is a different product from distribution service; the industrial or large-load customer class specifically; N-1 or other redundancy architecture at the supplying substation; contractual curtailment rights the utility may hold over the load; power quality and momentary interruptions, which this metric excludes by construction; on-site UPS, storage or generation; forward adequacy: it is a record of what happened, not a forecast.

Forward resource adequacy (assessed): Tight

Reserve margins are tightening as data-center demand surges: the 2025 capacity auction cleared at the $333/MW-day cap with an installed reserve margin (the supply cushion above expected peak demand) near 14.8%, below the 20% target, and FERC members flagged reliability concerns. Mitigants include possible retirement deferrals and a lower forecast peak.

What this means: A large new load should expect genuine exposure to forced power cuts (curtailment), price spikes, and delays in getting connected, and should design in backup power or firm supply contracts.

assessed · PJM capacity prices hit record (Utility Dive) · NERC 2024 LTRA (PJM elevated-risk)

Contractual service terms: firm with take or pay

Virginia's regulator approved a separate rate class and tariff (GS-5) for the largest loads, effective 1 January 2027. Service is firm, and it is bought on a 14-year contract that includes a four-year ramp. The customer pays monthly the higher of actual demand or a minimum: 85% of contracted transmission and distribution demand, and 60% of contracted generation. Ceasing operations before term triggers exit fees equal to the minimum demand charges over the unexpired term. There is limited relief: contracted demand can be cut by 20% with 36 months notice without exit fees, and by up to 50% if the released capacity can be reallocated to another customer. Before that, the contracting chain itself carries cost: $250,000 at engineering agreement, then a construction agreement under which the customer reimburses 100% of costs incurred if the project is cancelled before energization. The commercial risk here is not curtailment. It is that you pay for capacity you reserved and did not use, and that the reservation itself is expensive to unwind.

What the service contract promises, as distinct from how the system has performed · GS-5 Large-Load Rate Class Report, Dominion Energy (May 2026)

Designed site resilience: not applicable at market level

Utility feeds, UPS, storage, on-site generation, islanding, black start and the residual energy you still expect to lose are properties of a specific site design, not of a market. This layer only exists once there is a site, and we never assert it for you.

Confidence: High. Each input is labelled as measured, modelled, or drawn from a specific event, and is framed as a risk to a prospective large new load, not as a verdict on any utility or grid operator. Forward adequacy is an assessment of what is expected, not a measurement of what has happened; it is a forecast and is labelled as one.
Seller view: Tight forward capacity is scarcity that firm generation and storage get paid for; an adequacy flag is a demand signal for new supply, not only a risk to a load.

Supply relief outlook

Will the power crunch ease before your load energizes? This nets the demand racing for capacity against the new supply likely to arrive and the old supply leaving. A cross-side read, using the same data a seller sees the other way.
Tightening
Demand pressure
Fast load growth competing for the same capacity.
New supply in motion
About 36.0 GW of the generation and storage queue is likely to reach operation after historical withdrawal.
Can new supply arrive
PJM's reopened first-ready-first-served queue drew about 220 GW in its first cycle (106 GW gas, 67 GW storage), so the build pathway for new supply is genuinely open.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: tight.

What this means: The supply picture looks likely to tighten; a new load should lock firm supply early and expect competition for capacity.

Reliability metrics

Delivery reliability (measured)

The average customer loses about 131.3 minutes of power per year (2024). This is the standard regulator outage measure (SAIDI); lower means a more reliable grid.

Source: EIA Form 861, Schedules 3B and 3C (annual electric power industry report) (major event days identified by the respondent's own method, not IEEE 1366, customer-weighted blend of 1 utilities, regional context only)

Hard, cited measures behind the reliability overlay above: the regulator outage series (SAIDI, measured, published with a lag) and the forward resource-adequacy assessment (a measured forecast). Framed as risk to a prospective large new load, not a verdict on any utility.

Interconnection queue

These are generation and storage interconnection queues. They show how congested the interconnection system is. They do not measure how long a new large load waits, and their withdrawal rates are not load withdrawal rates. At the end of 2025, generation and storage projects totalling about 2,060 GW were actively waiting in United States queues, down 10% from a year earlier. Of the capacity that entered between 2000 and 2020, about 75% withdrew before connecting and only about 13% reached operation by end-2025. The typical project built in 2025 waited about 61 months from request to operation (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Queued Up 2026). Figures below are refreshed quarterly; each is labelled measured or modelled.

Active queue depth

144 GW

Typical wait

72 months

What builds the 72-month wait

36
12
18
Application & cluster entry6 mo
System impact / cluster study36 mo
Facilities agreement12 mo
Construction & energization18 mo
Typical time to energization72 months
How the typical connection wait breaks down by stage. Stages overlap in practice and vary by project; the split is our estimate anchored to the operator process, and the total is the representative time to energization. Anchored to the operator process (PJM speed-to-power, RMI).

The full queue analysis for this market, which covers the share of projects that give up and leave the queue (the withdrawal rate), how much of the queue is data centers, and the sources, is available through /api/v1/queue/northern-virginia with a paid key. These are generation and storage queue figures: they show interconnection-system congestion, not a typical large-load connection wait.

Seller view: A deep queue is both your own time-to-revenue and a moat against competing supply; what matters is the effective supply likely to complete after withdrawal, not the headline queue.

Forward cost anchor

Siting a load is a decade-long cost bet, so the forward cost of firm capacity matters more than today's spot price. This is the public capacity-auction clearing price, the market's own forward read, not a paywalled forward curve.

Forward cost pressure

Severe

Latest capacity clearing price

$333.44 per MW-day

2027/28 delivery year

Trend: Rising to the ceiling: cleared at the regulator-approved cap, with the region short of its reliability requirement for the first time.

PJM's capacity auction cleared at a record $333.44 per MW-day for 2027/28, the maximum allowed, and for the first time the whole region fell short of its reliability target. The forward cost of firm capacity is at its historical ceiling, driven by data-center load outpacing new supply.

Source: PJM 2027/28 Base Residual Auction (RTO Insider). A derived indicator: we publish the public clearing price and our read, never paywalled exchange data.

Seller view: This capacity clearing price is a direct revenue signal for new supply: a rising trend supports the build thesis, a falling one is a warning.

Realized cost band

What a large electricity user pays for power here on one declared case, 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service, per megawatt-hour. Not the wholesale price and not the sticker tariff: energy plus the grid, delivery and other charges that land on the bill. It is a range, because real contracts vary, and it is labelled by how it was built.

Recurring cost, delivered

$105 to $165 per MWh

Midpoint about $130 per MWh

How this band was built

triangulated

From 3 public fragments

What builds the $130 midpoint

$96
$20
Wholesale energy (Dominion zone)$96
Firm capacity (PJM auction)$20
Network & delivery$10
Ancillary & other$4
All-in delivered$130 /MWh
How the $130/MWh figure is built up, component by component, for 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service. The split is our estimate; the total is the midpoint of the compiled band (triangulated). Recurring cost only: customer-funded connection capital is a separate one-off and is not included. The capacity line reflects PJM's record Dominion-zone clearing prices and is charged on peak load contribution, so a high-load-factor data center pays close to the full amount. Energy is the Dominion-zone wholesale, the highest large-load energy price in the US coverage. Anchored to published figures (PJM capacity auction and Dominion zone prices (IEEFA)).

Where the cost lands

$130
Low $105Midpoint $130High $165
A band, not a single price: the cheaper end is a well-structured contract on favourable terms, the higher end a less optimised one. The midpoint is our best central read.
What is in the number: Energy near $96 per MWh in the Dominion zone, plus a firm-capacity charge from the record PJM auction and network and ancillary costs on top.

A large load in Virginia's data-center corridor pays well above the raw energy price once the record capacity-auction clearing price and network charges are layered in. This is the most expensive large-load market in the United States coverage, and a new data-center-specific rate class is being set that could move the band again.

This market's band is free here; the ranked cross-market table with every market's precise midpoint is the Analyst Desk. See the ranked view.

Basis: triangulated from public sources, in US dollars per MWh delivered to a large high-load-factor load, excluding refundable taxes. Sources: PJM capacity auction and Dominion zone prices (IEEFA) · Virginia data-center rate class (American Action Forum).

Seller view: This delivered price is the level a competitive supply offer must beat, and the revenue ceiling a merchant plant works against here.

Data provenance and freshness

What we hold for this market, field by field. Each tier below is assigned from the evidence actually held for that field, with provenance. A low tier means we looked and it is thin; it is not a verdict on the market.
cost: M3connection: M3reliability: M2carbon: M2regulatory: M2local capacity: M4
Against a Standardized Project Case, the binding field is reliability. That is what a standardized case would turn on here; a readiness result for your own project depends on your own requirements, siting and utility, which this market-level read does not know.
Read against other uses: Discovery and monitoring: M3 · Market comparison: M2 · Project Case with a carbon requirement: M2 · Conditional site diligence: M2.
Depth is not a rating strength, a confidence score or a feasibility conclusion. An aggregate is only ever shown for a named use case, and equals the lowest tier across that use case's required fields. Definitions v1.0. See the full coverage matrix.
How solid the data behind this rating is, on two separate axes plus recency. Source reliability is how measured the numbers are, as opposed to triangulated or modelled. Coverage is how many of the decision-relevant data dimensions (reliability, connection, and cost) are compiled for this market. The two are kept apart because they answer different questions: a market can have strong sources on the little that is covered, or broad coverage that still leans on models. Neither grades the rating itself. The rating is a cited opinion, graded separately and falsifiably by the public track record and baseline measurement plan.

Source reliability

High

3 of 4 data layers measured

Coverage

Full

3 of 3 dimensions: reliability, connection, cost

Last reviewed

June 2026

per-layer vintages below

LayerMethodVintageFreshnessSource
PGIQ Rating opinionopinionJune 2026CurrentPGIQ methodology
Reliabilitymeasured2024FreshEIA Form 861, Schedules 3B and 3C (annual electric power industry report) (major event days identified by the respondent's own method, not IEEE 1366, customer-weighted blend of 1 utilities, regional context only)
Forward costmeasured2027/28 delivery yearFreshPJM 2027/28 Base Residual Auction (RTO Insider)
Interconnection queuemeasuredend-2025 (LBNL 2026)FreshLBNL Queued Up 2026
Realized costtriangulated2026FreshPJM capacity auction and Dominion zone prices (IEEFA)

Freshness reflects each layer's refresh cadence: reliability annual to three-yearly, capacity-auction and queue yearly, tariffs every year or two. The full cross-market freshness dashboard is at /data-quality.

What this market can and cannot answer yet

No market-level read closes a project case on its own, and saying only that would waste the evidence we do hold. Below is what is established, what is open, and what to do next.

What is established

  • Recurring cost band $105 to $165 per MWh, midpoint $130, basis triangulated, against the 100 MW archetype
  • Historical utility-territory delivery performance 131.3 minutes per year (2024)
  • Historical bulk-system performance (event-based)
  • Forward resource adequacy (assessed)
  • Contractual service terms (reported)
  • Typical interconnection wait about 72 months (generation and storage queue, not a load wait)

What is open

  • Designed site resilience

Who would actually serve you

Territories in this market, each with its own filed record: Virginia Electric & Power Co. Which one serves a given site depends on where that site is.
Who runs the connection process: PJM Interconnection (regional transmission organisation), via New Service Request, plus the serving utility's own large-load process. PJM runs transmission interconnection; the distribution-level large-load path runs through the serving utility and its state regulator. Where the process starts.

Credible ranges today

  • Cost $105 to $165 per MWh, midpoint $130 (triangulated)
  • Schedule: interconnection queues here run about 72 months for generation and storage; a large load follows a different process and we do not hold its measured distribution

What could disqualify this market

  • Saturation and access are deteriorating for new build.
  • Rising power and capacity cost.

Five questions for the utility or system operator

  1. What is your own territory's SAIDI and SAIFI for the industrial class, on which major-event standard, and what redundancy serves the candidate substation?
  2. What is the available capacity at the bulk supply point and substation that would serve this site, and what would a 100 MW request do to it?
  3. Is firm service available at 100 MW, and what curtailment rights would you retain over us once we are energised?
  4. What are the milestone dates from a complete application to full firm energisation, and which network upgrades would a 100 MW load trigger?
  5. What is the all-in delivered rate for 100 MW at a 95% load factor, including demand, network and rider charges, under the tariff that would actually apply?

Documents that would advance the case

  • The utility's own reliability filing and the substation single-line diagram.
  • The area or substation capacity study, and the current queue position list.
  • The applicable large-load tariff or the draft electric service agreement.
  • The interconnection or system impact study, and a specimen connection offer.
  • The current tariff sheet with all riders, and any large-load contract terms.

Outlook drivers

↑ Upgrade triggers

  • PJM queue reform (first-ready, first-served) materially shortens new connection timelines.
  • Large new supply (gas, nuclear, SMRs) energizes in-zone.

↓ Downgrade triggers

  • Capacity prices and local moratoria pressure push new entrants out.
  • Reliability or ratepayer backlash tightens large-load rules.

Scheduled to change

Dated, already-announced events that will affect a large load sited here, in date order. These are published facts with sources, not our forecasts, and they matter most when your energization date is years out.
Aug 2026
RTO responses to FERC's large-load Section 206 order due (17 Aug 2026)
Could reset co-location and cost-allocation economics for large loads across PJM.
FERC

Key risks

Peer comparison

Trades like
Dublin (world-tier hub, gated entry)
Ahead of
ERCOT on openness
Behind
few on strategic importance

Evidence behind this rating

The real-world events that test our Tier 2 call for Northern Virginia (PJM): 4 support it and 1 challenges it. Each is dated and cited, so you can check the rating against what is actually happening on the ground.

PJM capacity auction clears at the $325 cap again, 6.8 GW short of the reliability requirement ✓ Supports the rating
Jul 2026CostMateriality: high

The 2028/29 Base Residual Auction (14 Jul 2026) procured 138,318 MW UCAP but cleared the footprint at the FERC-approved cap of $325/MW-day, 6,821 MW short of the reliability requirement, the second consecutive shortfall year.

Source: PJM Inside Lines ↗
Virginia enacts the first US per-kWh data-center electricity tax at $0.011/kWh ✓ Supports the rating
Jul 2026CostMateriality: high

The FY2026 budget imposes a consumption tax of $0.011/kWh on all electricity used by Virginia data centers from 1 Jul 2026, including behind-the-meter and self-generated supply, projected at about $600M a year. A structural cost adder in the world's largest market.

Source: Williams Mullen / VA HB30 ↗
Northern Virginia is the world's largest data-center market at ~4 GW, up ~37% in a year ▲ Challenges the rating
2025MomentumMateriality: high

Northern Virginia ended 2025 with roughly 4 GW of operating data-center capacity, up about 37% year on year and still the largest such market on earth, about 13% of global operational capacity. Demand keeps choosing the region despite the grid strain, an argument it may merit more than a middling tier, and a live test of whether access can keep pace.

Source: CBRE ↗
DOE emergency order lets PJM curtail data centers as heat pushes demand near the record ✓ Supports the rating
Jul 2026AvailabilityMateriality: high

A DOE 202(c) order (30 Jun 2026) authorizes PJM to direct curtailment of data centers and other large loads with backup generation as a last resort; the 2 Jul 2026 forecast peak of 166,241 MW approached the 2006 record of 165,563 MW and Pre-Emergency Demand Response was activated.

Source: PJM Inside Lines ↗
FERC orders all six US RTOs to justify or reform large-load tariffs
Jun 2026AccessMateriality: high

Section 206 show-cause orders (18 Jun 2026) preliminarily find each RTO/ISO tariff unjust and unreasonable for large-load integration; 60 days to respond (due 17 Aug 2026), covering study speed, cost allocation, co-location and behind-the-meter generation.

Source: FERC ↗
PJM's reopened, reformed queue draws 220 GW in its first cycle
Apr 2026AccessMateriality: med

811 projects (106 GW gas, 67 GW storage) under the first-ready, first-served reform, which aims to speed connections in the world's largest market.

Source: PJM Inside Lines ↗
PJM capacity auction clears at the price cap with a 6.6 GW reliability shortfall ✓ Supports the rating
Dec 2025CostMateriality: high

The 2027/28 Base Residual Auction (17 Dec 2025) cleared the whole footprint at the FERC-approved cap of $333.44/MW-day, the first auction where the entire RTO fell short of the reliability requirement; PJM attributes ~5,100 MW of forecast load growth to data centers.

Source: PJM Inside Lines ↗
Cited, dated developments tagged to the pillar they bear on, and whether they support or challenge the current tier. A material item flags the market for analyst review and may drive a rating action.
🔔 Get alerts for Northern Virginia (PJM)
Be notified the moment this market's PGIQ Rating, outlook, or a material development changes. Free while we validate demand.

Rating history

Jun 2026
Under reviewFERC's preliminary finding that PJM's tariff is unjust for large loads puts co-location and cost-allocation economics directly in play; direction uncertain pending the 60-day response and any rulemaking. Tier held for now, flagged for review.
Trigger: FERC Section 206 show-cause order (18 Jun 2026)
Jul 2026
Under reviewTwo high-materiality negatives in one cycle: capacity cleared at the cap with a first-ever RTO-wide 6.6 GW reliability shortfall (Cost, Availability), and emergency authority to curtail data centers as a class (Availability, with Access read-through). Review continues; direction uncertain until the 2028/29 auction clears, tier could hold or move down one notch.
Trigger: 2027/28 BRA shortfall at cap (17 Dec 2025) plus DOE 202(c) large-load curtailment order (30 Jun 2026); 2028/29 BRA results due 14 Jul 2026
Jul 2026
Under reviewA statewide $0.011/kWh consumption tax stacks on capacity prices at the cap and DOE-ordered curtailment exposure; direction of the Cost pillar is clearly negative, tier impact under assessment.
Trigger: Virginia data-center electricity tax effective 1 Jul 2026
Jul 2026
AffirmedA second consecutive capacity auction at the price cap confirms the structural cost pressure already reflected in the tier. Tier holds.
Trigger: 2028/29 BRA clears at the $325/MW-day cap with a 6.8 GW shortfall, 14 Jul 2026
June 2026
New ratingNew rating: Tier 2 Strong assigned (momentum override).
🔒 The full time series behind Northern Virginia (PJM), how its score, recurring cost, and interconnection queue have moved month by month, is part of the Analyst Desk. The rating actions above are always free.
Every rating action is dated and explained, and the log is only ever added to, never edited. Reviews happen on a regular schedule and whenever a significant event occurs. "Affirmed" means we reviewed a development and the tier held; "Under review" means a significant item is being assessed and the rating could change.

Score history

How Northern Virginia (PJM)'s reliability-adjusted score and tier have moved, month by month. Part of your Analyst Desk.

Loading history…

How does Northern Virginia (PJM) compare to the other 78 markets?

This page is our full read on Northern Virginia (PJM) alone, and it is free. To decide where a large load should actually go, you need every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the history and alerts when your shortlist moves. That is the Analyst Desk.

With your Analyst Desk, compare Northern Virginia (PJM) against every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the full history and shortlist alerts.

+ Add to your shortlist Recurring cost, ranked Connection friction, ranked Get the Analyst Desk →