On 21 August 2026 the Energy Department issued an emergency order under Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act directing PJM Interconnection and Constellation Energy to keep Units 3 and 4 of the Eddystone Generating Station in Pennsylvania available from 23 August through 20 November.1 US Department of Energy 2026-08-21 Announcement of the 21 August 2026 emergency order keeping Eddystone Units 3 and 4 available from 23 August through 20 November 2026; units originally scheduled to close 31 May 2025; DOE Resource Adequacy Report warning of a hundredfold rise in outages by 2030; Secretary Chris Wright on dispatchable generation during Mid-Atlantic heat waves. Open source It is the sixth such directive covering the same 760 megawatts since the units were scheduled to retire on 31 May 2025, and it is docketed as Order No. 202-26-40.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source The stake is that a statutory emergency instrument has become the thing holding up reserve margins in the largest US power market while AI data center load is added faster than generation, with the bill spread across every customer in the footprint.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source 4 Utility Dive 2025-08-18 FERC approved cost recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants, spreading Eddystone costs across the entire PJM footprint and rejecting requests to confine allocation to one state; Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the J.H. Campbell order; a Grid Strategies projection of up to $5.9 billion by 2028; Michigan attorney general and Sierra Club court challenge. Open source We assess with moderate confidence that 202(c) has stopped operating as an emergency tool in PJM and now functions as an unlegislated capacity mechanism, and that a seventh order is more likely than a November retirement.

What the order does, and who pays for it

The mechanics are narrow. Two units of 380 megawatts each, able to burn natural gas or distillate fuel oil, are required to remain available rather than required to run.3 Microgrid Media 2026-08-23 Order effective 23 August through 20 November 2026, following a 21 May 2026 order covering 25 May to 22 August; Units 3 and 4 at 380 MW each burning natural gas or distillate fuel oil; consumer advocate estimate of roughly $5.1 million for an earlier 90 day extension with the new order's cost not yet established; advocates note PJM previously found the units could retire without a transmission reliability violation. Open source The order takes effect 23 August and expires 20 November, immediately succeeding a 21 May order that covered 25 May through 22 August.3 Microgrid Media 2026-08-23 Order effective 23 August through 20 November 2026, following a 21 May 2026 order covering 25 May to 22 August; Units 3 and 4 at 380 MW each burning natural gas or distillate fuel oil; consumer advocate estimate of roughly $5.1 million for an earlier 90 day extension with the new order's cost not yet established; advocates note PJM previously found the units could retire without a transmission reliability violation. Open source The chain runs back further: orders dated 30 May 2025, 28 August 2025, 26 November 2025 and a February 2026 extension covering 24 February to 24 May, each finding that the conditions behind the original order persist.5 American Public Power Association 2026-02-23 February 2026 Eddystone extension covering 24 February to 24 May 2026; preceding orders dated 30 May 2025, 28 August 2025 and 26 November 2025; DOE finding that the emergency conditions behind the original orders persist; units ran over 124 cumulative hours during Winter Storm Fern, 26 to 29 January 2026. Open source There is no gap anywhere in that sequence. The plant has not operated outside an emergency order in fifteen months.

Cost recovery is the part that travels furthest. Constellation negotiated an arrangement with PJM to recover operating and maintenance costs, which PJM allocates using the same methodology it uses for capacity costs.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source That template was set in August 2025, when FERC approved recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants and spread Eddystone's costs across the entire PJM footprint, rejecting arguments that they should sit with Pennsylvania alone.4 Utility Dive 2025-08-18 FERC approved cost recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants, spreading Eddystone costs across the entire PJM footprint and rejecting requests to confine allocation to one state; Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the J.H. Campbell order; a Grid Strategies projection of up to $5.9 billion by 2028; Michigan attorney general and Sierra Club court challenge. Open source The sums are not yet large. Consumer advocates estimated an earlier 90 day extension at roughly $5.1 million, and the cost of this order has not been established.3 Microgrid Media 2026-08-23 Order effective 23 August through 20 November 2026, following a 21 May 2026 order covering 25 May to 22 August; Units 3 and 4 at 380 MW each burning natural gas or distillate fuel oil; consumer advocate estimate of roughly $5.1 million for an earlier 90 day extension with the new order's cost not yet established; advocates note PJM previously found the units could retire without a transmission reliability violation. Open source For scale on where the practice leads, Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the parallel order on the J.H. Campbell coal unit, and a Grid Strategies projection put the running total for this class of orders at up to $5.9 billion by 2028 if the trend holds.4 Utility Dive 2025-08-18 FERC approved cost recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants, spreading Eddystone costs across the entire PJM footprint and rejecting requests to confine allocation to one state; Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the J.H. Campbell order; a Grid Strategies projection of up to $5.9 billion by 2028; Michigan attorney general and Sierra Club court challenge. Open source

The load in the justification has mostly not arrived

DOE's reliability case rests on a gap between two forward numbers. Its analysis counts roughly 25 gigawatts of projected PJM load growth, of which about 15 gigawatts is data centers, against roughly 17 gigawatts of announced fossil fuel retirements.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source PJM's own 2030 forecast is larger still, 32 gigawatts of load growth with 30 gigawatts of it from large loads.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source The stress scenarios attached to the order produced 430 loss of load hours under average weather and 1,052 under worst case, with maximum unserved load of 21.3 gigawatts.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source DOE frames the alternative in its Resource Adequacy Report as outages rising a hundredfold by 2030 if reliable generation keeps retiring.1 US Department of Energy 2026-08-21 Announcement of the 21 August 2026 emergency order keeping Eddystone Units 3 and 4 available from 23 August through 20 November 2026; units originally scheduled to close 31 May 2025; DOE Resource Adequacy Report warning of a hundredfold rise in outages by 2030; Secretary Chris Wright on dispatchable generation during Mid-Atlantic heat waves. Open source

Set the remedy against the diagnosis. PJM peaked at 168,158 megawatts on 2 July 2026.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source Eddystone's 760 megawatts is under half a percent of that peak and under five percent of the 17 gigawatt retirement wave the order is meant to offset, both figures derived from the cited numbers rather than stated by DOE.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source We assess with high confidence that the order is not sized to close the gap and was never intended to. Its function is to stop the gap widening by one plant per quarter while something structural is negotiated elsewhere. That is a defensible thing to do once. Doing it six times is a policy, and it was not made by Congress or by a rate case.

The sourcing here deserves a caveat. The 25, 15 and 17 gigawatt figures reach the public through a single trade outlet's reading of DOE's reliability analysis rather than through a document we read directly, and the underlying data center load is forecast, not metered.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source

Who gains and who loses

Constellation gains most directly: revenue and negotiated cost recovery on generation it had scheduled for closure, with the recovery socialized across PJM rather than borne by its own customers.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source 4 Utility Dive 2025-08-18 FERC approved cost recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants, spreading Eddystone costs across the entire PJM footprint and rejecting requests to confine allocation to one state; Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the J.H. Campbell order; a Grid Strategies projection of up to $5.9 billion by 2028; Michigan attorney general and Sierra Club court challenge. Open source Data center developers with queue positions in PJM gain indirectly and considerably. The reserve margin their forecast load is straining is being propped up by a federal order they neither pay for as a distinct charge nor have to satisfy as a condition of interconnection. PJM gains a reliability outcome without having to run its own must-run negotiation to get it. DOE gains a demonstration of its argument about dispatchable generation, which Secretary Wright made in the announcement.1 US Department of Energy 2026-08-21 Announcement of the 21 August 2026 emergency order keeping Eddystone Units 3 and 4 available from 23 August through 20 November 2026; units originally scheduled to close 31 May 2025; DOE Resource Adequacy Report warning of a hundredfold rise in outages by 2030; Secretary Chris Wright on dispatchable generation during Mid-Atlantic heat waves. Open source

The losers are diffuse by design. Every retail customer in PJM pays a share of Eddystone because FERC spread the allocation footprint-wide.4 Utility Dive 2025-08-18 FERC approved cost recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants, spreading Eddystone costs across the entire PJM footprint and rejecting requests to confine allocation to one state; Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the J.H. Campbell order; a Grid Strategies projection of up to $5.9 billion by 2028; Michigan attorney general and Sierra Club court challenge. Open source Pennsylvania Consumer Advocate Darryl Lawrence has argued that PJM's system is fragile in extreme weather and that large data centers represent demand at a scale not seen since heavy industry, which is an argument for planning rather than for repeated emergency findings.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source Developers of replacement generation lose a price signal: an administratively preserved unit suppresses the scarcity that would otherwise fund new build in eastern Pennsylvania. And the units burn gas or fuel oil, so the environmental cost of the delay accrues to the same footprint that pays for it.3 Microgrid Media 2026-08-23 Order effective 23 August through 20 November 2026, following a 21 May 2026 order covering 25 May to 22 August; Units 3 and 4 at 380 MW each burning natural gas or distillate fuel oil; consumer advocate estimate of roughly $5.1 million for an earlier 90 day extension with the new order's cost not yet established; advocates note PJM previously found the units could retire without a transmission reliability violation. Open source

The counter-case

The strongest argument against reading this as policy laundering is that DOE may simply be right about timing. As one analyst put it, load is arriving faster than replacement generation, which is a physical problem no procedural objection dissolves.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source Eddystone is not a theoretical asset: the units ran more than 124 cumulative hours during Winter Storm Fern in January 2026.5 American Public Power Association 2026-02-23 February 2026 Eddystone extension covering 24 February to 24 May 2026; preceding orders dated 30 May 2025, 28 August 2025 and 26 November 2025; DOE finding that the emergency conditions behind the original orders persist; units ran over 124 cumulative hours during Winter Storm Fern, 26 to 29 January 2026. Open source If the reliability analysis is roughly correct, retiring 760 megawatts for the sake of process purity at a cost of a few million dollars a quarter is a poor trade. Elizabeth Whitney's caution that three to five year modeling is currently hard to trust cuts against the order and in favor of it at the same time: if nobody knows, a cheap option on availability is rational.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source

For our assessment to be wrong, one of two things has to happen. DOE lets the November expiry lapse and the units actually retire, or the structural fix lands fast enough that the order becomes redundant rather than routine. Consumer advocates also point out that PJM itself previously found the units could retire without creating a transmission reliability violation, a finding DOE has now overridden six times without PJM reversing it publicly.3 Microgrid Media 2026-08-23 Order effective 23 August through 20 November 2026, following a 21 May 2026 order covering 25 May to 22 August; Units 3 and 4 at 380 MW each burning natural gas or distillate fuel oil; consumer advocate estimate of roughly $5.1 million for an earlier 90 day extension with the new order's cost not yet established; advocates note PJM previously found the units could retire without a transmission reliability violation. Open source If that finding still stands on the record in November, the emergency framing is weaker than the order implies.

What to watch

  • A seventh order by 20 November 2026. If DOE issues another extension inside the expiry window, the practice is confirmed as continuous rather than episodic. A lapse, with the units actually retiring, would be the single strongest evidence against the reading above.1 US Department of Energy 2026-08-21 Announcement of the 21 August 2026 emergency order keeping Eddystone Units 3 and 4 available from 23 August through 20 November 2026; units originally scheduled to close 31 May 2025; DOE Resource Adequacy Report warning of a hundredfold rise in outages by 2030; Secretary Chris Wright on dispatchable generation during Mid-Atlantic heat waves. Open source
  • The cost of this order gets published. The prior 90 day extension was estimated at roughly $5.1 million by consumer advocates; watch whether the actual recovery filed with PJM for the August to November period lands near that or well above it by early 2027.3 Microgrid Media 2026-08-23 Order effective 23 August through 20 November 2026, following a 21 May 2026 order covering 25 May to 22 August; Units 3 and 4 at 380 MW each burning natural gas or distillate fuel oil; consumer advocate estimate of roughly $5.1 million for an earlier 90 day extension with the new order's cost not yet established; advocates note PJM previously found the units could retire without a transmission reliability violation. Open source
  • Data center load named in the next justification. The current order is framed on general resource adequacy while the supporting analysis is 60 percent data center growth.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source If a future order names large loads directly as the cause, it opens the question of why the causing load is not the paying load.
  • Cost allocation challenged. The Campbell order drew a court challenge from a state attorney general and the Sierra Club.4 Utility Dive 2025-08-18 FERC approved cost recovery paths for DOE-ordered plants, spreading Eddystone costs across the entire PJM footprint and rejecting requests to confine allocation to one state; Consumers Energy reported $29 million in the first 38 days of the J.H. Campbell order; a Grid Strategies projection of up to $5.9 billion by 2028; Michigan attorney general and Sierra Club court challenge. Open source Watch for a comparable challenge to footprint-wide recovery in PJM through 2027; success there would force the cost onto a narrower base and change the arithmetic of every future order.
  • Replacement capacity in eastern Pennsylvania. The exit from this pattern is new firm generation clearing near the constrained load. If PJM's next capacity auction produces new build in the region, the emergency orders have a defined end. If it does not, expect the same 760 megawatts to be ordered available into 2027.2 Data Center Knowledge 2026-08-25 DOE Order No. 202-26-40 under Section 202(c), 760 MW, sixth directive since the 2025 retirement date; roughly 25 GW of projected PJM load growth including 15 GW from data centers against about 17 GW of announced fossil retirements; PJM 2030 forecast of 32 GW growth with 30 GW from large loads; 430 and 1,052 loss of load hours and 21.3 GW maximum unserved load; PJM peak of 168,158 MW on 2 July 2026; Constellation cost recovery allocated on the capacity cost methodology; comment from Darryl Lawrence, Neil Osnato and Elizabeth Whitney. Open source

The interesting question is no longer whether Eddystone closes. It is what happens the first time an emergency order is written for a plant whose only reason to exist is a data center that has not been built yet.