ARRC User Group asks PJM Members Committee to add "affordability" to Board duties
The user group's proposal, passed April 29, asks the Members Committee to vote in August on adding "affordability" to the PJM Board's duties and responsibilities.
Why it matters → ARRC's presentation states that arrearages rose from $15.44 billion in January 2022 to $21.05 billion in September 2024.■
The ARRC User Group passed its proposed changes to the PJM Operating Agreement on April 29 for the Members Committee's consideration.1
The proposal is to include "Affordability" into the PJM Governing documents.2
The presentation asks the Members Committee to consider and vote in August to approve adding "affordability" to the duties and responsibilities of the PJM Board.3
Notice of the ARRC User Group's formation was provided to PJM on December 4, 2025.4
Notice of the ARRC User Group was provided to the Members Committee by PJM in January 2026.5
The ARRC approved its charter at its inaugural User Group meeting on January 27, 2026.6
The ARRC User Group's current members include the Delaware Division of the Public Advocate, the Illinois Attorney General's Office (Public Utilities Bureau), the Illinois Citizens Utility Board, the Maryland Office of the People’s Counsel, the New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel, the Office of the People’s Counsel for the District of Columbia, the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel, and the Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate.7
Section 8.7, clause (a), of the provision shown in the presentation states that any five or more Members sharing a common interest may form a User Group, and may invite other Members to join.8
After the Members Committee Chair refers the matter to the applicable Standing Committee, that committee takes it up at a regular meeting occurring no earlier than 30 days after the referral, then makes a recommendation to the Members Committee.9
Coverage notes
Gridlight’s notes on what we looked for and did not find; these statements are Gridlight’s own and are not claim-checked against archived sources.
- The presentation says the ARRC User Group "passed" its proposed changes on April 29 but does not report a vote tally, so this piece does not say whether the group met the three-fourths-majority threshold Section 8.7(d) sets for a User Group submission.
- ARRC's presentation says "affordability" should not be defined; this piece does not say what adding the term to the Board's duties would mean in practice, and does not state as fact that the Members Committee will take up or vote on it in August — only that the presentation asks for that vote.
- The materials reviewed do not identify which Standing Committee, if any, received a Section 8.7(d) referral of this proposal, or whether the 30-day post-referral meeting step described in the presentation has already occurred; this piece does not state either.