Why FERC Order 1920 Could Reshape Long-Term U.S. Grid Planning

The U.S. grid is being asked to plan farther ahead

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Order 1920 is emerging as a consequential policy shift in how the U.S. transmission system plans for growth, reliability, and uncertainty. The rule requires transmission operators to conduct long-term regional planning over at least a 20-year horizon, refresh those plans every five years, and test multiple plausible scenarios using the best available data. In practical terms, it pushes grid planning away from shorter-range, inward-looking exercises and toward a more transparent process built for a system under heavy strain.

The timing is not accidental. Electricity demand is rising, extreme weather is becoming a more important planning factor, and the generation mix is changing. Grid congestion, delays, and rising costs are all symptoms of a transmission network that has struggled to expand at the pace required. Order 1920 is an attempt to force longer-range thinking before those pressures become even more difficult to manage.

The rule itself was finalized in 2024 after three years of development and stakeholder feedback, according to the source text. That long lead time reflects how contested transmission planning can be. New lines are expensive, politically complex, and often slow to build. But the absence of forward-looking planning can be just as costly when demand outgrows infrastructure or reliability weakens under stress.

What the order requires

The source text highlights several core requirements. Transmission operators must plan across a minimum 20-year time frame. They must update those plans at least every five years. They must use at least three plausible and diverse scenarios based on the best available data. And they must consider grid-enhancing technologies as well as the option to right-size aging infrastructure instead of simply replacing it like for like.

Each of those requirements addresses a real weakness in older planning habits. Long horizons matter because major transmission investments take years to permit, finance, and construct. Scenario analysis matters because no single forecast can capture the range of pressures now facing the grid, from data center growth to the increasing penetration of renewables. And the requirement to consider grid-enhancing technologies recognizes that capacity can sometimes be improved through smarter use of existing infrastructure rather than new construction alone.

The rule therefore does not just call for more planning. It calls for a more explicit planning discipline, one that acknowledges uncertainty instead of hiding it inside a single preferred forecast.

Defensibility is becoming part of the job

One of the most significant ideas in the source material is that Order 1920 creates an external accountability standard. Planning can no longer function only as an internal technical exercise. Assumptions must be traceable, methods must be explainable, and recommendations must be defensible when regulators, states, and other stakeholders ask why a conclusion was reached.

That is a meaningful change in emphasis. Transmission planning has always involved technical modeling, but the rule recognizes that models now operate in a more contested environment. States may have different policy goals. Regulators may question whether a project is economically justified. Communities may want to understand why one option was selected over another. A plan that cannot be clearly explained is less likely to survive that scrutiny.

In that sense, “defensibility” is not just a procedural word. It is a signal that transmission planning must now be built for public challenge as well as engineering rigor. The technical answer is no longer enough by itself; planners also need a transparent chain from assumptions to recommendations.

Why this matters for the energy transition

Transmission is the connective tissue of the power system. If it lags behind load growth, generation changes, or weather risk, the rest of the system becomes harder and more expensive to operate. That is why Order 1920 matters beyond planning departments. It sits at the intersection of reliability, affordability, and decarbonization.

A grid expected to absorb more renewable generation, support new industrial loads, and serve regions under increasing climate stress cannot rely on static planning logic. It needs a structured way to compare futures and justify investments before the bottlenecks become acute. Order 1920 is an effort to create that structure.

The emphasis on diverse scenarios is especially relevant. A future shaped by data centers may look different from one shaped mainly by electrification or extreme weather. Planning around a single storyline risks locking in the wrong investments. Requiring at least three scenarios does not eliminate uncertainty, but it reduces the chance that planners mistake one forecast for destiny.

The implementation challenge

The hard part will be execution. Long-term planning rules can set expectations, but they do not automatically produce consensus, better data, or faster project delivery. Transmission development still faces familiar obstacles, including cost allocation disputes, permitting delays, and disagreement over who benefits from which projects.

That is why transparency may prove as important as technical sophistication. If stakeholders can see how assumptions were chosen, how alternatives were evaluated, and how conclusions were reached, disputes may become more focused and more manageable. If they cannot, Order 1920 risks becoming another formal requirement layered on top of a process that remains politically stalled.

Even so, the rule marks a notable shift in federal expectations. It tells transmission operators that planning is no longer just about maintaining the present system. It is about preparing a future system under conditions of uncertainty and doing so in a way that can withstand public and regulatory scrutiny. In an electricity landscape defined by rapid change, that may be the most important planning reform of all.

This article is based on reporting by Utility Dive. Read the original article.