PJM / interconnection queue

Why it matters

Three signals worth tracking in the regulatory-knowledge-graph and gas-feasibility page: (1) 106 GW of gas-fired in the new queue is roughly 10x the typical PJM gas-tied additions in a normal cycle and almost certainly contains a large share of co-located / data-center-tied generation rather than utility-procured capacity — meaning the new PJM queue is structurally a data-center-power buildout, not a generation-mix transition. The headline implication for Cliff is that gas-feasibility consolidation page becomes the right surface to model: which states' new-build gas-tied projects clear PJM's revised queue process versus get held up at state air permit / siting authority. (2) 18 GW of nuclear in the queue is the largest nuclear surge in the PJM queue history and almost entirely SMR / advanced-reactor proposals — a tell that the Vistra / Talen / Constellation co-location-with-existing-nuclear playbook has triggered a new-build-nuclear cohort that didn't exist 18 months ago. (3) The Expedited Interconnection Track is the structurally important piece for Cliff's developer-financing capital stack — 10 projects per year with state-siting-authority support is the explicit route by which a hyperscaler with state-political-capital can short-circuit the standard 4–6 year PJM queue. The state-siting-authority gate is exactly the political-economy chokepoint that's becoming the binding constraint as local moratoriums proliferate; an EIT-ineligible site is now a separate de-rate input. The April 29 queue reopening is the real demand-side data point that monetizes against the May 4 RFI's 14.9 GW backstop number — the queue tells you what gets built, the RFI tells you what PJM will buy if the queue under-delivers.