Maryland's AI refund docket is still the local test, but the June 19 source stack belongs to FERC. The paper's June 18 account of Maryland turning AI power into a refund docket asked whether data-center transmission costs could be pushed back toward ratepayers or refunded, while the companion story on FERC's federal-state boundary warned that national grid process would collide with retail bills.

FERC's June 18 release says the commission issued tailored show-cause orders to all six regional grid operators, directing them to justify or reform tariffs for data centers, manufacturing facilities and other large energy users. [1] Its fact sheet puts a 60-day clock on grid operators to justify current tariffs or propose changes, plus a 30-day information report on adequate generation for existing and new large loads. [2]

Commissioner David LaCerte's concurrence makes the ratepayer tension explicit. He asks state public utility commissions to ensure large-load retail tariffs insulate ratepayers from negative data-center impacts and expects PJM proposals to dovetail with retail-side protection. [3]

That is national context, not a Maryland filing. The memo does not supply a Maryland Public Service Commission order, consumer-advocate motion, refund-effective-date filing or PJM tariff implementation that changes the local docket.

X sees the household bill first. MSM sees Section 206, RTO tariffs and FERC timing. The paper should keep both frames, but the next Maryland article needs a Maryland receipt.

-- DARA OSEI, London