The SEEM case centers on a controversial new bilateral trading platform created by monopoly utilities in the Southeast, approved at FERC by operation of law after a deadlock rather than through a normal reasoned decision. Energy Alabama and others have consistently opposed SEEM, arguing it functions as an exclusive loose power pool that violates FERC rules by restricting access, excluding independent power producers, and enabling preferential intra-pool transmission terms, ultimately harming competition and consumers. After the D.C. Circuit vacated parts of FERC’s earlier reasoning and remanded the case, intervenors pushed for a swift ruling by FERC on remand, asserting ongoing delay benefits the utilities and allows an unlawful market design to operate unchecked. FERC nevertheless upheld SEEM’s approval in a majority decision after requiring modest improvements to allow entities located outside the SEEM footprint to participate. Recently, the parties reached an uncontested settlement now filed for FERC approval that would increase real-time price transparency, which if accepted would end the litigation and appeals.