On what UTC date will FERC first issue an order granting, in whole or in material part, Constellation’s Crane capacity-interconnection-rights transfer waiver request in Docket No. ER26-2028-000?

• My median prediction for the issuance of a FERC order granting the waiver is 30th June 2026.
• This date coincides with the scheduled start of PJM’s 2028/2029 Base Residual Auction, representing the critical deadline for the Crane facility to qualify for capacity credits.
• Constellation Energy management has publicly guided for a decision in the “June or July 2026” window, reinforcing the likelihood of mid-summer action.
• The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) faces significant institutional pressure to act, given a $1 billion Department of Energy loan and a 20-year power purchase agreement with Microsoft that hinges on the project’s viability.
• While the Independent Market Monitor opposes the waiver, the lack of formal opposition from the grid operator (PJM) and recent policy momentum for nuclear restarts suggest a favorable ruling is more likely than not.
• Briefing in the docket was completed on 11th May 2026, providing FERC with sufficient time to review the record before the late-June deadline.

Key figures

Historical context

Historically, FERC uses a strict four-part test for tariff waivers: (1) good faith, (2) limited scope, (3) addresses a concrete problem, and (4) no undesirable consequences. A notable precedent is the November 2024 “Talen Order,” where FERC rejected an amended agreement for the Susquehanna nuclear station due to concerns over cost allocation and reliability impacts of behind-the-meter data center arrangements. This shows FERC’s willingness to block nuclear-to-data-center deals if they risk market distortion. However, the current “Crane” request differs by seeking a transfer of rights from retired units rather than just a “behind-the-meter” co-location, which may bypass some of the specific concerns raised in the Talen case. PJM’s neutrality in this docket (intervening but not opposing) contrasts with more contentious historical cases, often a signal that a technical “workaround” is viewed as acceptable by the grid operator. In December 2025, FERC also ordered PJM to clarify co-location rules, signaling an active regulatory interest in facilitating these large-load interconnections.

Tailwinds

• Strong federal support, including a $1 billion DOE loan guarantee, places political pressure on regulators to facilitate the restart of clean energy assets.
• The 20-year Microsoft PPA provides a clear “concrete problem” (meeting carbon-free energy demand) that the waiver helps solve.
• PJM Interconnection has intervened without opposing the request, suggesting the grid operator does not view the transfer of rights as a threat to reliability.
• Recent executive comments on 11th May 2026 indicate a “clear path” for approval and confidence in a June/July resolution.
• FERC has been moving with “unprecedented” speed on large-load interconnection issues as evidenced by their 18th December 2025 co-location order.

Headwinds

• PJM’s Independent Market Monitor (Monitoring Analytics) filed formal protests on 21st April and 11th May 2026, arguing the request fails all four parts of FERC’s waiver test.
• The request involves complex tariff provisions (OATT § 311(B)(4), etc.) that could require more than the requested 60-day review period to ensure no “undesirable consequences” for other market participants.
• FERC could issue a “deficiency letter” or call for a technical conference instead of a final order, which would technically not resolve the question and would delay a final decision.
• Internal scheduling conflicts or a lack of quorum at FERC could push the decision past the June 30th auction deadline.

Detailed reasoning

My analysis for the predicted median date of 30th June 2026 is driven by the convergence of legal deadlines, executive guidance, and the operational requirements of the PJM capacity market. Constellation Energy filed its waiver request on 31st March 2026, creating a natural three-to-four-month window for FERC review, which is standard for contested but high-priority energy dockets.

The primary anchor for this forecast is the 2028/2029 PJM Base Residual Auction (BRA), which is scheduled to begin on 30th June 2026. For the Crane Clean Energy Center to participate and secure capacity credits, FERC must issue an order granting the waiver before this date. Regulatory bodies often align significant orders with such market milestones to ensure market certainty.

Furthermore, Constellation’s senior management provided explicit guidance during their 11th May 2026 earnings call. Executive Vice President David Dardis and CEO Joseph Dominguez stated they expect a response in the “June-July timeframe.” While the company requested action by 1st June 2026, the completion of the briefing on 11th May makes a May resolution unlikely given the complexity of the “four-part waiver test” and the formal opposition filed by PJM’s Independent Market Monitor (Monitoring Analytics).

The reasoning process weights the “market pressure” of the 30th June auction date most heavily, followed by the “procedural cadence” of FERC. The Commission typically issues orders on the third Thursday of the month (the Open Meeting), which falls on 18th June 2026. If the Commission does not act during the Open Meeting, it frequently uses “notational orders” (decisions made without a public meeting) during the final business days of a month to clear high-priority items. I have therefore centered the median on the final day of June, reflecting the maximum point of institutional pressure to resolve the matter before the auction begins.

A secondary scenario accounts for a slight delay into July. If FERC determines that the IMM’s objections regarding market distortions require additional internal deliberation, the order could slip into the July 16th Open Meeting window. However, the $1 billion DOE loan and the high-profile nature of the Microsoft PPA suggest a level of political and economic urgency that usually prevents such slippage when a hard market deadline like the BRA is present. The forecast reflects a ~65% confidence that the waiver will eventually be granted, acknowledging that the IMM’s technical arguments pose a credible risk of denial.

Key uncertainties

• A denial in the initial order (Docket No. ER26-2028-000) would result in the question never resolving positively, even if a later request is granted.
• FERC could issue a “tolling order” to buy more time, which would push the decision date beyond the start of the PJM auction.
• If the Commission chooses to align this specific waiver with broader rulemaking on data center interconnections (expected late June), the specific order could be delayed or subsumed into a larger policy statement.
• Changes in the composition of the Commission or a shift in focus to other high-priority reliability issues could stall the proceedings.

Conclusion

• Decision-makers should treat 30th June 2026 as the high-probability focal point for regulatory clearance, aligning with the commencement of PJM’s capacity auction.
• Monitor the June 18th FERC Open Meeting as the first major opportunity for a resolution; failure to act by this date increases the likelihood of a late-month “notational” order.
• The outcome is binary for the 2028/2029 auction; an order issued after June 30th, even if favorable, may be too late for the Crane facility to qualify for the immediate auction cycle.

Question: whether FERC will issue a qualifying order granting at least one of the requested waivers in Docket ER26-2028-000 (Constellation/Crane’s request to transfer CIRs from Eddystone Units 3/4 to Crane) before the 2026-08-12T12:00Z cutoff. As of 2026-05-19 no qualifying issuance appears in eLibrary; the pleading cycle is complete and Constellation has asked FERC to act by 2026-06-01, but the docket was not on the 2026-05-21 open-meeting agenda (FERC could still act notationally or by delegated order). The record is contested: the PJM IMM formally opposes all three waivers citing third‑party harm and queue disruption, while PJM itself did not formally oppose but warned FERC not to pre-judge study results—this split is the core merits signal under FERC’s four‑part waiver standard. Historical precedents show quick grants for narrow housekeeping Attachment DD waivers (30–60 days) but longer timelines or denials for contested interconnection/queue-impact matters (~90 days or denial), so timing could be early June via notational action or stretch into June/July open-meeting windows. Forecasters’ probabilistic estimates clustered around ~39–42% chance of a qualifying grant by the deadline and ~58–61% chance of no qualifying grant, reflecting the strong negative signal from the IMM and the modest positive signal from PJM’s conditional stance and Constellation’s requested timing. Recommended monitoring is FERC eLibrary Issuance for ER26-2028-000 and any Sunshine agenda entries for the June 18 and July 16 meetings; verify ordering paragraphs (not just explanatory text) if an order appears.

Forecast and Reasoning

Forecast: Probability distribution:

• 5.00% chance of value below 2026-06-06 12:00:00 UTC
• 10.00% chance of value below 2026-06-12 12:00:00 UTC
• 20.00% chance of value below 2026-06-19 12:00:00 UTC
• 30.00% chance of value below 2026-06-26 12:00:00 UTC
• 40.00% chance of value below 2026-07-03 12:00:00 UTC
• 50.00% chance of value below 2026-07-10 12:00:00 UTC
• 60.00% chance of value below 2026-07-17 12:00:00 UTC
• 70.00% chance of value below 2026-07-25 12:00:00 UTC
• 80.00% chance of value below 2026-08-16 12:00:00 UTC
• 90.00% chance of value below 2026-08-26 12:00:00 UTC
• 95.00% chance of value below 2026-09-02 12:00:00 UTC

Forecast Reasoning

All four analysts agree the earliest plausible qualifying grant is in June 2026 (after briefing completed around mid-May), with the highest density in late June through mid-July driven by (i) the record being essentially complete, (ii) Constellation’s stated June/July expectation, and (iii) commercial urgency ahead of PJM’s late-June/early-July 2028/2029 BRA timeline. Where they diverge is the probability of a qualifying grant by the deadline: Forecaster 2 and 3 imply a high in-window grant probability (roughly 85–90%+ by 2026-08-12), while Forecaster 1 implies a much larger tail of “no qualifying grant by the deadline” (≈45%).

I discount Forecaster 4’s very-early (late May/June 1) percentiles because they effectively assume FERC will meet the applicant’s requested action date; with contested comments (IMM opposition) and only ~1 week since the last substantive filing, that seems too aggressive for the lower tail. I also discount Forecaster 1’s very large >deadline mass as likely too pessimistic given (a) PJM not opposing, (b) credible third-party/management expectations of action in June/July, and (c) FERC’s ability to grant conditionally/partially if it wants to avoid a hard “yes/no” stalemate.

However, I still keep a meaningful open-upper tail (roughly low-20%s) because the resolution requires an actual grant in the ordering paragraphs; a timely denial, abeyance/tolling/procedural action, or delay beyond 2026-08-12T12:00Z all produce a “>2026-08-12T12:00:00Z” outcome. The contested nature plus the market-design implications create real risk that no qualifying grant appears by the deadline even if the Commission acts procedurally.

Net synthesis: center the median in early-to-mid July (close to Forecaster 2/3), keep the early-June tail modest (against Forecaster 4), and represent ~20–25% probability mass beyond the open upper bound by moving p80 and above strictly past 2026-08-12.

An amateur forecast would likely anchor tightly on “June or July” statements (or the requested June 1 date / BRA timing) and place nearly all mass inside the window, underweighting the specific resolution criterion that only an order granting waivers in the ordering paragraphs counts. This forecast explicitly prices the substantial (though not dominant) chance of: (i) denial/no-grant by the deadline, or (ii) procedural delay that fails to produce a qualifying grant by 2026-08-12T12:00Z, by placing upper percentiles strictly past the bound rather than pretending the outcome must occur in-range. Confidence in improvement: moderate—FERC timing is inherently noisy, but the tail-risk handling is a common amateur failure mode on open-bounded date questions.

Forecast rationale (numeric):

— Iteration 1 — Across the forecasts, the core logic is that FERC’s timing will be driven primarily by the PJM 2028/2029 Base Residual Auction deadline in late June or early July 2026. If FERC is going to grant Constellation’s waiver, the most likely window is just before that auction so Crane can qualify in time.

Key factors shaping the judgment:

• Commercial deadline pressure: The approaching BRA is treated as the main forcing function, making a mid-to-late June decision especially likely if FERC intends to act favorably.
• Typical FERC processing speed: Waiver requests of this kind often receive action within roughly 60–90 days of filing, which points naturally into June or July given the March 31 filing date.
• Mixed procedural signals:
  • PJM’s non-opposition and broader policy support for clean energy increase the odds of a grant.
  • IMM’s substantive opposition and FERC’s general reluctance to expand waiver relief could slow the case or make approval less certain.
• Likely form of action: Because the matter is contested, the forecasts lean toward a formal Commission order rather than a very quick routine disposition.
• Fallback scenario: A meaningful possibility remains that FERC does not grant relief by the August 12 cutoff, either because it denies, defers, issues a deficiency letter, or otherwise delays—so “> Aug. 12” is treated as a real alternative outcome.

Areas of consensus:

• The most likely grant window is mid-to-late June 2026, with early July also plausible.
• The BRA timing is the dominant driver of the expected decision date.
• Approval is plausible but not assured.

Main disagreement:

• The forecasts differ mainly on how much delay is likely: some expect a grant before the BRA in late June, while others think the Commission may slip into early July or even fail to issue a grant by the August deadline.

— Iteration 2 — The forecasts converge on a similar core thesis: FERC is likely to act relatively quickly, with the first qualifying grant order most plausibly arriving in late June to mid-July 2026, because the request is tightly tied to PJM’s upcoming Base Residual Auction window.

Main reasoning patterns

• Deadline pressure from PJM market timing

  • The waiver is seen as commercially important before the late June / early July BRA.
  • This creates a strong incentive for FERC to resolve the matter before that auction window, or soon after.

• Typical FERC pace

  • Several rationales assume FERC often resolves waiver-type matters within roughly 60–90 days.
  • Since briefing closed around May 11, that timeline points naturally to late June or early July.

• Signals from outside observers

  • Reference is made to market participants and counsel expecting a June/July outcome, reinforcing the idea that a favorable order is plausible on that schedule.

Main uncertainty drivers

• Substantive opposition from the IMM

  • The IMM’s opposition is the main factor pushing the forecast toward delay, uncertainty, or a possible denial.
  • This is why the distribution is not centered on an immediate grant.

• Procedural delay risk

  • Possibilities include deficiency letters, additional review, hearing/set-for-paper, or no action by the deadline.
  • These outcomes create a long tail into August and beyond.

Areas of consensus

• A qualifying grant order is most likely in late June or early July 2026 if it comes in time.
• The matter is time-sensitive, with the BRA serving as the key practical deadline.
• The forecast should be right-skewed, reflecting meaningful risk of delay beyond the requested window.

Areas of disagreement

• The main difference is how confident to be in a timely grant:
  • Some see a fairly strong chance of a June order.
  • Others attach substantial probability to delay or no qualifying action before the cutoff.
• There is also some variation on whether the modal date is late June versus mid-July, but not on the general June/July window itself.

— Iteration 3 — Across the forecasts, the dominant reasoning is that commercial urgency will drive FERC timing. Constellation filed the waiver on March 31, 2026, specifically to qualify for the PJM 2028/2029 Base Residual Auction in late June/early July, so the key assumption is that FERC has a strong incentive to act before that market deadline. The most likely issuance window is therefore mid-June through early July 2026, with late June / early July as the central cluster.

Main factors driving the forecasts

• Auction deadline pressure: The request is tied to a near-term commercial milestone, which tends to accelerate agency action.
• Procedural readiness: Briefing is effectively complete, so FERC could issue an order relatively quickly.
• Expected decision points: The June 18 open meeting is seen as a natural opportunity, though a delegated letter order shortly before the auction is also plausible.
• Likely approval path: Some rationales emphasize that the request appears likely to be granted, at least in material part, because the issue is time-sensitive and approval would preserve market access.

Areas of consensus

• If FERC acts favorably, it is most likely to do so before the auction window rather than after.
• The highest-probability period is late June to early July.
• A final order, if granted, is likely to arrive well before the August 12 deadline.

Areas of disagreement / uncertainty

• How fast FERC moves: Some rationales expect a tighter mid-June spike, while others allow for a broader early-to-mid July window.
• Risk of delay or denial: One line of reasoning treats the request as meaningfully contested, especially due to the PJM Independent Market Monitor, which raises the chance of a deficiency letter, hearing, or denial.
• Tail risk: There is some probability of a resolution that comes late enough to miss the practical auction deadline, though that is treated as a minority scenario.

Overall synthesis

The collective view is that FERC is under strong practical pressure to issue a grant-or-partial-grant order soon, with mid-June through early July 2026 the most plausible issuance window. The main uncertainty is not the existence of pressure, but whether procedural opposition slows the process enough to push the decision later or outside the relevant auction timeline.

Summary of Rationales

Forecasts regarding the timing of FERC’s decision on Constellation’s Capacity Interconnection Rights (CIR) transfer waiver center on a tug-of-war between commercial urgency and regulatory opposition.

The Case for Expedited Approval A primary driver for a swift decision is Constellation’s need to qualify the Crane Clean Energy Center (Three Mile Island) for PJM’s upcoming Base Residual Auction (BRA), which opens on June 30, 2026. To meet this, Constellation requested an order by June 1. Forecasters highlight massive political and economic tailwinds supporting this timeline, including federal pushes for nuclear reliability to satisfy AI data center load (e.g., Microsoft) and Department of Energy involvement.

Crucially, while PJM intervened in the docket, the grid operator did not oppose the waiver, signaling a lack of catastrophic grid reliability concerns. Forecasters note that if FERC intends to grant the waiver—even conditionally—it is highly incentivized to issue a just-in-time decision via notational voting or at its June Open Meeting to avoid disrupting the BRA.

The Case for Delay or Denial The strongest headwind is fierce opposition from PJM’s Independent Market Monitor (IMM). The IMM argues that the cross-node CIR transfer bypasses vital interconnection studies and constitutes harmful “queue jumping.” Because the docket is deeply contested, FERC is under pressure to draft a legally bulletproof order to withstand inevitable appellate review.

Forecasters agree that FERC’s standard procedure for handling complex, highly contested objections is to issue a “deficiency letter” requesting more data. Doing so would toll the statutory 60-day clock and easily push the final decision into late summer or fall, well past the mid-August resolution boundary. Alternatively, FERC could outright deny the waiver based on recent precedent against queue-jumping, which would similarly resolve the timeline out of bounds.

Key Procedural Milestones The rationales focus on a few critical windows:

• Late May to Early June: Aligning with the expiration of the statutory 60-day clock and Constellation’s requested deadline.
• Mid-to-Late June: Encompassing FERC’s June Open Meeting and the immediate run-up to the June 30 PJM auction.
• Mid-July: Falling on FERC’s July Open Meeting, serving as a backup window if the order requires extra deliberation but avoids a formal deficiency letter.
• Post-August Cutoff: Representing scenarios where the IMM’s protest forces a deficiency letter, an evidentiary hearing, or an outright denial.

Agent Forecast (date, confidence: medium)

• After Aug 12, 2026: 45.0%
• Jun 30, 2026 to Jul 11, 2026: 13.0%
• Jun 20, 2026 to Jun 30, 2026: 12.0%
• Jun 09, 2026 to Jun 20, 2026: 10.0%
• Jul 11, 2026 to Jul 22, 2026: 9.0%

Base Rate: No precise sourced base rate for FERC contested PJM tariff-waiver processing times was located. Insider/professional anchors: Constellation executives publicly expect June or July action; ClearView Energy Partners assessed approval as ‘likely’ (April 8, 2026); both imply >50% grant probability. Counter-anchors: contested FERC waiver dockets frequently extend 4-6+ months from filing, and the IMM’s substantive opposition raises real procedural and legal risk of decisions past Aug 12.

Initial Reasoning:

• Trajectory 1 reasoning

  Briefing in Docket ER26-2028-000 closed on May 11, 2026 (8 days ago) with the IMM’s final answer opposing all three waivers.
• Constellation executives stated on May 11 that FERC could rule ‘as early as next month’ (June), and the commercial deadline of the 2028/2029 BRA (closes July 7, 2026) creates urgency.
• ClearView rated approval ‘likely’; PJM does not oppose but seeks narrow tailoring.
• The IMM raises real legal hurdles (four-part waiver test, especially the ‘undesirable consequences’ prong), making denial a meaningful possibility (~35-37% combined with no action by Aug 12).
• Probability mass is concentrated in the Jun 9–Jul 11 window (reflecting Constellation’s own ‘June or July’ guidance, 4-8 weeks after briefing completion).
• The ‘After Aug 12’ bin at 0.37 reflects primarily the risk of denial or no qualifying order.

Trajectory 2 reasoning

Briefing closed May 11, 2026 (IMM answer).

• FERC’s stated target for contested pleading decisions is 60–90 days post-answer (July 10–Aug 9), but the PJM BRA starting June 30 creates strong incentive to act at the June 18 open meeting.
• PJM itself supports the waiver, the IMM is the sole opponent, and ClearView assessed approval as ‘likely’; P(grant by Aug 12) ≈ 62%.
• No order issued as of May 9, 2026.
• Peak probability is Jun 9–Jun 20 (includes June 18 meeting) at 22%.
• The 38% tail reflects ~22% denial probability (IMM’s substantive four-part test challenge has real legal weight despite PJM’s support) plus ~10% no-action-by-deadline risk — concrete reasons rather than general uncertainty.
• TAIL JUSTIFICATION: P(denial before Aug 12) ≈ 22% and P(no FERC action by Aug 12) ≈ 10% together account for ~32% of the 38% tail; both outcomes resolve as ‘>Aug 12’ per the resolution criteria, and IMM’s opposition to all four waiver criteria represents a genuine legal risk even given PJM’s support.

Trajectory 3 reasoning

Briefing is complete in ER26-2028-000 as of May 11, 2026 (IMM’s Answer to Answer).

• Constellat

Key Uncertainties:

• Whether FERC’s Republican majority gives controlling weight to IMM’s ‘deliberate business preference’ / four-prong failure argument or to PJM’s non-opposition and the BRA commercial deadline
• Whether FERC issues a substantive order before the July 7 BRA close or instead issues a tolling/deficiency letter, paper hearing, or holds the matter past Aug 12
• Whether FERC acts via delegated letter order between meetings or waits for the June 18 or July 16 open meeting
• Whether a partial grant (one of three waivers) materializes — would still qualify under the broad reading

Evidence Sources (19):

• ANS Nuclear Newswire: FERC decision on Crane restart coming in June or July, Constellation execs say (May 13, 2026)
• IMM Answer to Answer, Docket No. ER26-2028, filed May 11, 2026
• Utility Dive: PJM market monitor opposes waivers for Constellation’s Three Mile Island
• ROI-NJ: FERC OKs capacity auction price collar (May 1, 2026)
• Eyes and Ears: IMM opposes Constellation Waiver Request; PJM does not oppose but seeks narrow order
• JDSupra/Morgan Lewis: FERC Withdraws Proposed Tariff Waiver Policy Statement (Nov 2025)
• DOE 2026 202(c) Orders Page
• IMM Comments, Docket No. ER26-2028, April 21, 2026
• BNN Bloomberg: Constellation Energy tops profit estimates (May 11, 2026)
• https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/energy/articles/pjm-market-monitor-opposes-waivers-103254465.html
• https://www.utilitydive.com/news/senate-confirms-ferc-swett-lacerte/802321/
• https://www.troutmanenergyreport.com/2024/11/ferc-rejects-co-located-load-increase-proposal-at-nuclear-facility/
• https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2020/08/industry-participants-weigh-in-on-ferc-proposal-to-limit-availability-of-tariff-waivers
• https://www.power-eng.com/business/constellation-files-at-ferc-to-keep-crane-nuclear-restart-on-2027-timeline/
• LinkedIn - Christopher Thornton: FERC Decision on Crane Restart Now Imminent
• FERC - Complaint Resolution Paths and Target Time Frames
• Troutman Washington Energy Report - FERC Accepts PJM’s Replacement Generation Interconnection Process
• FERC Events Calendar - July 16, 2026 Open Meeting
• FERC Order ER20-1473-000 - AEP Generation Resources (May 29, 2020)

Grounding Facts (passed to reviewers):

1. Constellation executives expect a FERC decision in June or July 2026

Draft: After Aug 12, 2026: 37.7%, Jun 09, 2026 to Jun 20, 2026: 17.0%, Jun 20, 2026 to Jun 30, 2026: 13.3%, Jun 30, 2026 to Jul 11, 2026: 11.7%, Jul 11, 2026 to Jul 22, 2026: 7.7%

Reviewer Panel:

Reviewer (reasoning)

The draft leans heavily on Constellation’s optimistic timeline and ClearView’s ‘likely’ approval rating while underweighting FERC’s historical processing times for contested waiver requests and the high frequency of procedural delays (deficiency letters, hearings, tolling orders) that push decisions past planned targets. It also neglects to ground its timing assumptions in a base-rate of similar cases and overinterprets Constellation’s June/July guidance as binding. These gaps make the forecast appear overconfident in a June/July resolution.

Objections:

• No incorporation of historical base rates for contested tariff-waiver decision timelines at FERC (often 4–6 months or longer).
• Underestimates probability of procedural steps (deficiency letters, paper hearings, or tolling orders) that would defer any grant past Aug 12, 2026.
• Overrelies on Constellation executives’ public guidance and ClearView’s assessment without verifying alignment with FERC’s actual open-meeting schedule and past practice.

Reviewer (calibration)

The forecast appears to understate the legal weight of the Independent Market Monitor’s (IMM) opposition, which often carries significant influence with FERC, especially when detailed legal arguments against the four-part waiver test are presented. While Constellation’s executives are optimistic and urgency exists, FERC’s decisions are primarily based on legal precedent and tariff interpretation, not just commercial deadlines or general policy. The forecast also places peak probability earlier than FERC’s stated 60-90 day target for contested pleadings, which might be overly optimistic for a complex legal issue.

Objections:

• The forecast may underestimate the impact of the IMM’s detailed legal arguments against all four prongs of the waiver test. FERC often gives substantial weight to IMM recommendations, and their opposition on substantive legal grounds represents a higher hurdle than implied.
• The forecast relies heavily on Constellation’s internal expectations and ClearView’s assessment, which might be biased or not fully account for the legal complexities. PJM’s ‘neutral’ stance or ‘seeking narrow tailoring’ also suggests less than full endorsement, which could align with some of the IMM’s concerns.
• The forecast’s peak probability for a grant in June, despite FERC’s stated 60-90 day target (July 10-Aug 9) for contested pleadings, might be too aggressive. While commercial urgency exists, it doesn’t guarantee a full grant or an expedited decision, especially if the legal arguments are complex.

Reviewer (fact-checker)

2 factual error(s). 2 unsupported claim(s). Verdict: minor_issues

Unsupported claims:

• FERC’s stated target for contested pleading decisions is 60–90 days post-answer (July 10–Aug 9)
• No order issued as of May 9, 2026

Objections:

• [minor] Constellation executives stated on May 11 that FERC could rule ‘as early as next month’ — Corpus says: Corpus documents reference both a May 11, 2026 earnings call and a May 12, 2026 Q1 earnings call for the statements about expecting a decision in June or July.
• [minor] PJM itself supports the waiver — Corpus says: Corpus states PJM intervened without opposing the waiver request but sought a narrowly tailored order.

Adjustment Rationale:

Adjusted draft downward in response to reviewer feedback. Three changes: (1) Removed the unsupported ‘60-90 day FERC target’ anchor that fact-checker correctly flagged; (2) Increased tail probability from 37-38% to 45% to better account for IMM’s substantive four-prong challenge (calibration reviewer) and historical risk of procedural delays — deficiency letters, tolling orders, or paper hearings — in contested waiver dockets (reasoning reviewer); (3) Shifted peak from Jun 9-20 to Jun 30-Jul 11, reflecting that briefing only closed May 11 and FERC needs time to draft a contested order, while still capturing BRA-deadline (July 7) urgency. I did NOT adopt the full 42% ensemble anchor because the fundamentals supporting grant remain strong: PJM does not oppose (seeks narrow tailoring rather than opposes), ClearView (professional analyst) assessed approval as ‘likely’, Constellation’s GC/executives publicly expect June or July action, nuclear restart has bipartisan and Trump-administration backing, and the BRA commercial deadline creates genuine institutional urgency on FERC. The IMM is the sole opponent and its opposition, while substantive, faces a record where the directly affected party (PJM) does not push back. Settling at ~55% in-window grant probability balances these factors against the reviewer-flagged procedural and legal risks. TAIL JUSTIFICATION: P(denial) ~28% reflecting IMM’s strong four-prong challenge given FERC’s cautious post-Nov 2025 waiver stance; P(no action / tolling / deficiency by Aug 12) ~17% reflecting contested waiver procedural risk — together accounting for the full 45% tail.

forecast_sdk | 414.5s | research $1.8411 + reviewers $0.0084 + reconcile $0.2318 = $2.1220

TL;DR

I put a 62.0% probability on a qualifying FERC grant by 2026-08-12T12:00:00Z, with the largest single date mass on 2026-06-18 and a 38% tail for denial, deferral, or no qualifying order.

Context

Constellation filed the Crane waiver request in ER26-2028-000 on 2026-03-31, with accession number 20260331-5562 and a 2026-04-21 comment deadline (Federal Register notice). The restart is backed by a 20-year Microsoft power-purchase agreement and would restore about 835 MW of nuclear capacity at the Crane Clean Energy Center, formerly Three Mile Island Unit 1 (Constellation release).

The request is live because PJM’s Phase I System Impact Study identified contingent upgrades with projected in-service dates as late as December 2030, and Constellation asked FERC for waiver by 2026-06-01 to let it transfer Eddystone CIRs to Crane (Constellation Q1 2026 10-Q). Monitoring Analytics opposed the request on 2026-04-21 and answered again on 2026-05-11, while PJM did not oppose but said later PJM transmission studies must still control the actual transfer effects (IMM comments, IMM answer, Utility Dive).

Evidence

The historical backbone is recent FERC electric-waiver practice. I used a small N=6 reference class of publicly visible electric waiver or PJM capacity/interconnection cases, with order dates from 2025-06-03 through 2026-04-16 and the unit measured as days from filing to order. This is current-public vintage as of 2026-05-19, not a real-time internal docket feed.

The timing read is clearer than the merits read. Crane was filed on 2026-03-31 and had its comment deadline on 2026-04-21 (Federal Register notice). The routine grant clock points to early June; the contested or non-routine PJM clock points to late June through mid-July. The 2026-06-18 open meeting is day 79 from filing and day 58 after comments, while the 2026-07-16 open meeting is day 107 from filing and day 86 after comments; FERC’s 2026 calendar lists those meetings and no August meeting (FERC 2026 meeting schedule). The May 21 agenda does not list ER26-2028-000, so a regular May-meeting order is unlikely, though FERC can vote on business days outside open meetings (May 21 Sunshine Act notice, FERC meeting guide).

The positive merits case is real. PJM did not oppose; ClearView called FERC approval “likely”; Constellation executives told investors they expect to know the FERC outcome in June or July; and the DOE closed a $1 billion loan to support the Crane restart (Utility Dive, ANS Nuclear Newswire, DOE). The negative merits case is also real. The IMM says the requested waivers fail every part of FERC’s waiver test, would alter core PJM queue rules, could shift upgrade costs, and could let Constellation rely on market-power review done under different facts (IMM comments). The IMM’s answer adds that PJM had not reviewed Constellation’s findings, PJM studies control, and denial would not prevent Crane from operating as an energy resource (IMM answer).

I model this as a 70% chance that a merits order grants at least one requested waiver, multiplied by an 89% chance that such a grant arrives by the cutoff. That gives 62.0%. The date distribution is 2% in the rest of May, 31% in June, 26% in July, 3% in August before the cutoff, and 38% in the final >2026-08-12T12:00:00Z bucket.

What’s non-obvious

The public story sounds like “FERC decides whether Crane can connect.” That is too broad. A narrow, conditional order that grants one waiver while leaving PJM studies in control would satisfy this question but might still leave Constellation with less than the full 760 MW of useful CIR value. PJM’s own posture points in that direction: it did not oppose a waiver in principle, but it said the final impact, cost allocation, contingent facilities, and CIRs available at the new location must come from PJM studies (Utility Dive).

The counterweight is that PJM neutrality is not technical endorsement. The IMM’s 2026-05-11 answer says PJM had not reviewed Constellation’s findings and that PJM’s planning studies control, so FERC can deny the waiver without blocking Crane from operating as an energy resource (IMM answer). That is why I am below the more bullish approval reads.

Limitations

I could not verify a complete live eLibrary docket sheet for ER26-2028-000 in text form. I relied on the Federal Register notice, Monitoring Analytics pleadings, FERC meeting materials, company disclosures, FERC orders in analogous dockets, and trade press.

The reference class is thin and imperfect. Routine MISO commercial-operation-date extensions are too easy a merits analogue, while recent PJM denials are closer on queue discipline but not identical to a nuclear restart with PJM non-opposition and federal support. The biggest unknown is FERC staff’s internal framing: a case-specific reliability accommodation that can be conditioned on PJM studies, or a tariff workaround that should be denied.