The disclosure and our analysis
Evidence dates
Evidence: American Electric Power Company, Inc. Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2026, filed October 28, 2026, and AEP's third quarter 2026 earnings release, filed as Exhibit 99.1 to a Form 8-K on October 28, 2026. Read October 29, 2026. Figures are as of those filings unless noted.
What AEP disclosed about Piketon
1. **Agreements:** AEP says that in August 2026, AEP Ohio Transmission Company (OHTCo), Ohio Power Company (OPCo) and an unaffiliated customer executed definitive agreements related to OHTCo building three 765 kV transmission lines to support the development of a proposed 10.4 GW data center campus in Piketon, Ohio. The filing does not name the customer. [Source 1]
2. **Lines and timing:** each line is expected to provide about 3.2 GW of incremental transmission capacity, with targeted in-service date goals of December 31, 2028, 2029 and 2030. [Source 1]
3. **First 800 MW:** AEP says the initial 800 MW of load is expected to be served using existing transmission capacity and does not require any additional regulatory approvals. [Source 1]
4. **Who pays:** for the balance of the roughly 10.4 GW, and subject to regulatory approvals, AEP says OHTCo expects to recover approved transmission costs through arrangements with OPCo, which would recover them from the customer under a retail service agreement designed so that none of the project's costs are allocated to other OPCo customers. [Source 1]
5. **Economics:** the agreements provide for a base return on equity of 11.35%, which can rise to 11.99% or fall to 10.71% depending on actual costs against budget and actual in-service dates against targets, with payment terms extending 20 years after each line's in-service date. They establish a project budget of about $5 billion. The equipment purchase agreement requires the customer to fully collateralize OHTCo equipment purchases before the required approvals are received. [Source 1]
6. **Approvals still needed:** AEP says the Piketon Transmission Project requires approvals from PJM, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio and FERC, and that its scope, timing, cost recovery and economics remain subject to regulatory review. [Source 1]
What AEP disclosed about contracted load
AEP says it signed 15 GW of new load commitments during the third quarter and that its incremental contracted load is expected to grow to 84 GW by 2031. It says projects count as incremental contracted load only if backed by fully executed electric service agreements or letters of agreement. AEP also announced a $100 billion capital plan for 2027 through 2031, including about $37 billion for transmission and $36 billion for generation. [Source 2]
The 10-Q adds a Texas figure. AEP Texas has executed letters of agreement for about 49 GW of incremental load by 2031, including prospective load seeking consideration in ERCOT's Batch Zero process. AEP says ERCOT has paused Batch Zero classification and study activity and will not authorize large loads to energize until a state directed verification is complete, so the amount, timing and cost responsibility of those prospective interconnections remain subject to ERCOT and PUCT action. [Source 1]
How to read the megawatts
The 10.4 GW is AEP's description of the proposed campus. The filing does not say whether that figure is utility service capacity, peak demand or critical IT load, and it should not be read as IT capacity. The 3.2 GW per line is incremental transmission capacity. The 84 GW and 49 GW figures are utility load forecasts backed by service agreements or letters of agreement, not data center capacity, and AEP does not say how much of either is data center load. A letter of agreement is not the same commitment as a fully executed service agreement.
Status
On our status vocabulary, as of October 28, 2026: the Piketon campus is Proposed, in AEP's own word. The transmission project has executed agreements but is not Approved; it still needs PJM, PUCO and FERC approval. The filing establishes no construction, energization or capacity Available to new customers at the campus.
Buyer analysis
This is our analysis, not AEP's. The Piketon terms show the shape utilities now want for very large loads: the customer funds the dedicated transmission, collateralizes equipment before approvals, and pays over 20 years, with the utility's return tied to cost and schedule. Buyers negotiating with providers that are building in AEP territory should expect similar cost responsibility to be passed through in some form.
The schedule is the other signal. Only 800 MW can be served on existing transmission. The rest depends on three new lines whose targets run to the end of 2030, and on approvals not yet granted. A 10.4 GW headline therefore says little about near term capacity at the site.
On the contracted load total, the 49 GW of Texas letters of agreement is equal to more than half of the 84 GW, and AEP counts letters of agreement as contracted load. The reviewed filings do not say outright how much of the 49 GW is inside the 84 GW. Either way, Texas load tied to a Batch Zero process that, by AEP's account, is paused should be treated as less firm than load backed by executed service agreements.
We have not assigned this story to a tracked market. Piketon is in southern Ohio, outside the Columbus market we cover.
