Building the high-voltage grid requires a path forward that balances competition with coordination. As demand from data centers and industrial growth surges, the U.S. faces a critical need for new transmission capacity. Most high-voltage projects are decided through transmission planning processes, but recent filings have intensified a debate over whether the market should drive competition or if incumbent utilities should maintain control.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
Antitrust limits on information sharing
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
A framework for interregional projects
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
Related: Surprises Act arbitration abuse persists despite new data
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
FERC Order 1000 shifted policy toward competition, but a new report sponsored by a coalition of transmission owners and investors argues that current antitrust policies hamper efficient investment. The Grid Strategies report suggests that antitrust rules are blocking the kind of information sharing necessary for the grid to grow. Specifically, the report identifies two types of collaboration that it says are often barred: utility joint ventures to develop specific projects and coordination among competitors on project selection.
Experts distinguish between these two activities. Project-specific joint ventures can align incentives and spread risk, potentially enabling projects that would not otherwise move forward. Mark Niefer, a former Department of Justice antitrust official, notes that these ventures can facilitate the construction of additional or lower-cost transmission capacity. However, coordination over which projects should be built raises a more significant concern regarding output restrictions.
The Niskanen Center has asked the Department of Justice to confirm that nonexclusive transmission joint ventures are generally procompetitive. While project-specific collaboration has clear benefits, the report highlights that the current legal framework struggles to balance these advantages against broader antitrust concerns.
Current policy debates often focus on the right of first refusal (ROFR) for projects selected by regional transmission plans. However, evidence suggests that the largest system-wide benefits come from interregional and cross-interconnection transmission. These projects can most efficiently deliver gains for affordability and reliability. There are indications that advocates of ROFRs for regionally approved transmission may be more open to competition for interregional and cross-interconnection projects. The 2024 Grid Strategies report states that in areas with no existing transmission, such as offshore networks and interregional lines, there is likely to be a greater role for independent developers and competition.
FERC has an opportunity to create a formal framework for interregional planning. An interregional planning rulemaking could address cost allocation for multiregion projects, reduce regulatory barriers to HVDC development, and improve coordination across RTO and non-RTO regions. While some industry voices have suggested that competitive processes may make sense for high-capacity, high-voltage interregional greenfield projects, no such framework currently exists. Without a clear set of rules, the potential for these projects to deliver the greatest grid benefits remains unrealized.
