That points to a bigger problem with these multi-state NPV agreements. They are probably unenforceable. If one state decides to unilaterally violate the terms of the agreement, then I don’t see what kind of recourse another state might have to enforce it.
Enforce?
No.
“Coerce” by funding promises or “back-door” projects and bribes from the dictatorship around the waffling state? Certainly! And, with the “NPV agreement” inpalce, a GROUP of “NPV electors INSIDE that state can “change their minds” as required (because of the NPV agreement offers an excuse) and vote blue “because the Popular Vote demands it!”
Thus, Pennsylvania now is a 100% block vote in the Electoral Collage. Probably wrongly so because its STUPID governor vetoed and proportional vote law based on political judgment and “GrOPe” advice, but no matter now. So, a group of blue (communist) electors within PA CHANGES their vote from ‘promised red” to “voted blue” BECAUSE of this agreement.
Those 15 or 25 “blue electors” flip the Electoral College from republican to democratic.
They don't need an NPV agreement to do any of that. As you pointed out, these are all reliably "blue" states that have signed the agreement anyway.
Go back to my previous post with the scenarios I presented. Can you even imagine in your wildest dreams a scenario where a Democratic presidential candidate wins the national popular vote but doesn't carry New York or California?