daily · Energy Markets

PJM filing seeks integrated Ohio Flagship study, not project or cost-allocation approval

PJM's October 13 filing covers approximately 9,570 MW of additional load and 10,170 MW of gross new generation. Developer study funding is explicit; construction, service rights and final cost recovery require separate decisions.

By Greener Numbers Editorial Team · Published October 26, 2026 · Updated 10/26/2026

PJM's October 13 filing in FERC docket ER27-126-000 seeks acceptance of a study agreement for the proposed Flagship AI data-center, generation and transmission development in Ohio. The filing describes a technical evaluation under the State Agreement Approach. It is not evidence that the facilities have been built or approved for construction.

The project is centered around the former Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Pike County. PJM describes an initial 800 MW phase under Ohio Power's Data Center Tariff, plus an expansion with approximately 9,570 MW of additional load and 10,170 MW of gross new generation. Those are separate figures, not a single completed ten-gigawatt operating campus.

The expansion includes proposed gas-fired generation, three proposed 765-kV transmission lines and related infrastructure, with phased completion described through 2032. PJM would study whether the identified transmission is sufficient and what additional facilities may be needed. The filing says the tailored process retains substantive reliability standards.

SE DC DevCo is responsible for PJM's actual study costs. The agreement requires a $500,000 study deposit upon execution and another $500,000 upon new specifications for a revised study. The deposits are not a ceiling on actual study costs, and study funding is distinct from final infrastructure cost allocation.

PJM says SB Energy has committed to paying for required power-delivery infrastructure and network upgrades through arrangements designed to protect other customers. The filing also explicitly states that specific cost-allocation and recovery mechanisms remain subject to applicable PUCO and FERC proceedings. A developer commitment does not itself settle all future rate treatment.

The study does not select transmission projects or developers, establish cost allocation, grant transmission service or interconnection rights, or approve construction. This brief describes the October 13 filing rather than a later regulatory decision. Households should not read it as a guaranteed bill reduction or a completed finding that the project creates no reliability burden.

Official source: pjm.com ↗