Holding Pattern: FERC’s Leadership Gap Meets Data Center Gridlock

Originally published for customers August 13, 2025.

What’s the issue?

A FERC leadership gap opened when Chairman Mark Christie left at the end of June 2025, leaving the Commission with two Democrats and one Republican until President Trump’s nominees were confirmed. As of mid-August 2025, David Rosner was rumored to take over as interim chair, with some tying the move to data center policy, though no appointment had been announced.

Why does it matter?

FERC was weighing PJM’s rules for pairing large generators with data centers, a question then sitting under a pending Section 206 show cause order and a Fifth Circuit appeal. The co-location proceedings themselves merit close attention regardless of who holds the gavel.

What’s our view?

With no permanent chair and confirmations of Laura Swett and David LaCerte not expected until late fall or early winter 2025, whoever held the interim chair had a narrow window to steer unfinished co-location work.

This analysis, published for Arbo customers on August 13, 2025, examines the FERC leadership gap that followed Chairman Christie’s departure and what it meant for the Commission’s unresolved data center co-location proceedings in PJM. It covers the confirmation timeline, the Section 206 show cause docket, and the Susquehanna appeal at the Fifth Circuit.

Update: Since this Insight was published, David Rosner served as interim FERC chair for roughly two months. The Senate confirmed Laura Swett and David LaCerte on October 7, 2025, and President Trump named Swett chair on October 23, 2025. FERC issued its co-location show cause order on December 19, 2025, and a PJM Bring Your Own Generation compliance order on April 16, 2026.

The Confirmation Clock: When Would FERC Get New Commissioners?

As we discussed in Leadership Matters — Especially When the Law Doesn’t Change Much and The Exit Interview: Chairman Christie Departs as FERC Faces Pressure Below and Ahead, Swett was nominated on June 2 and LaCerte on July 16, 2025. Those pieces detail their backgrounds: Swett’s extensive FERC and industry experience and LaCerte’s limited direct energy regulatory work.

The Senate’s August recess ran through September 2, delaying any confirmation votes until after lawmakers returned. Historically, the process from nomination to confirmation takes about four months, but adding a month for the recess pushed the likely timeline for seating new commissioners to late fall or early winter 2025.

Until that clock ran out and new candidates were seated, the Commission sat with a 2-1 Democratic majority. If action were necessary in the interim to advance data center co-location initiatives at the Commission, Rosner’s vote could prove key.

How FERC Got Here on Data Center Co-Location

We last covered data center co-location in Circuit Breaker: FERC Pulls the Plug on Data Center Co-Location Deal, when FERC rejected amendments to an interconnection agreement for a data center at the Susquehanna nuclear plant. That order was decided 2-1, with Commissioners See and Christie in the Republican majority, a rare Chairman Phillips dissent for the Democratic minority, and Commissioner Rosner not participating.

That same day, FERC held a technical conference on large-load co-location. On November 22, 2024, Constellation Energy filed a complaint against PJM, arguing its tariff was unjust and discriminatory for lacking clear rules on fully isolated co-location configurations.

On February 20, 2025, FERC issued a show cause order under Section 206 of the Federal Power Act, consolidating the Constellation complaint with the technical conference record. The order found PJM’s tariff appeared to be unjust and unreasonable and directed PJM and its Transmission Owners to either justify the status quo or propose tariff changes. Commissioners Christie, Phillips, Rosner, and See participated; Commissioner Chang did not. As of mid-August 2025, the Commission had not acted further on the show cause order.

Recusals shaped early co-location votes by determining which commissioners participated. Federal ethics rules require a 12-month recusal from matters involving former clients or employers. If that was a factor in any past absences, those timelines had lapsed by mid-2025 for Rosner (confirmed June 17, 2024) and Chang (confirmed July 15, 2024), removing one potential procedural barrier to their participation going forward.

The Litigation Track: Susquehanna’s Catch-22 at the Fifth Circuit

Since those first co-location orders in November 2024, Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC had challenged FERC’s rejection of its amended interconnection agreement in the Fifth Circuit. In its petitioner brief, Susquehanna described its position as an “untenable Catch-22” — unable to proceed under PJM’s current tariff, which lacked rules for fully isolated co-location, and unable to secure site-specific terms through a non-conforming agreement because FERC found they failed the three-prong test for approval.

That description also captured where the Commission stood in August 2025: litigation outstanding in the Fifth Circuit over FERC’s initial rejection order, with FERC’s brief due in October, and no meaningful action yet on the Section 206 show cause proceeding. In that context, leadership mattered. A chair could help guide the outcome of the PJM proceeding even as the court case continued. This is the same tension that continues to shape where data centers get built and how they secure power.

What the FERC Leadership Gap Means for Co-Location

Christie’s departure left both a leadership gap and a slimmer vote margin. With quorum intact, the Commission could act, and with potential recusal barriers cleared, Rosner and Chang were able to participate in upcoming co-location votes. The idea that Rosner’s appointment could be aimed at moving co-location policy forward had not been officially confirmed by the administration as of publication. Still, the combination of leadership change, pending litigation, ongoing regulatory work, and a narrow window before new commissioners were seated made this a moment worth watching — and it fed directly into FERC’s continuing work on large-load interconnection.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the FERC leadership gap in the summer of 2025?

Chairman Mark Christie left FERC at the end of June 2025, dropping the Commission to a 2-1 Democratic majority with no permanent chair until President Trump’s nominees, Laura Swett and David LaCerte, were confirmed.

What is the PJM data center co-location proceeding?

On February 20, 2025, FERC issued a Section 206 show cause order finding PJM’s tariff appeared unjust and unreasonable for lacking clear rules on co-locating large loads, such as data centers, with generation, and directed PJM to justify the status quo or propose tariff changes.

Why did FERC’s leadership matter for co-location?

With the show cause proceeding and the Susquehanna Fifth Circuit appeal both unresolved, the commissioner holding the interim chair could influence the timing and direction of any Commission action during the gap before new members were seated.

If you would like to discuss how FERC’s leadership transition and unresolved co-location proceedings could shape data center power supply and market opportunities, please contact us.