PSC: MTEP Timing Adjustments to incorporate Feedback (PAC-2021-4) (IR091) (20210209)

The Environmental Sector thanks MISO for its presentation at the April PSC and for the opportunity to provide additional feedback on this issue. We are supportive of MISO’s plan to host two extra meetings for stakeholders to request information and discuss alternatives, and of its intent to design an alternatives submission form. We also support the setting of a firm alternatives submission deadline, but stress that stakeholders must have ample time with adequate information to design alternatives before the deadline. 

We disagree with MISO’s statement that “establishing a firm deadline for TOs to populate all project information will [not] be helpful." Several stakeholders noted the lack of data in initial TO submissions and emphasized the need for more information earlier in the process. While additional meetings to request data from TOs are a positive development, stakeholders shouldn't have to rely on the goodwill of TOs to provide the information necessary to develop alternatives in the time between Sep. 15th and the date when the models with justifications are provided (usually March/mid-April). More disclosures should be required in the fall months in order to make the time from September-March a meaningful alternatives development period.

In addition to supporting a deadline for TOs to submit project information, we reiterate our previous request for MISO to require more information from its Members on their needs and plans in the next 10-15 years. A clearer view of long-term Member plans would add significant value as MISO engages in planning that looks 20+ years into the future.

LS Power supports the comments submitted by the TDU sector regarding issue PAC-2021-4.  The information provided by transmission owners for bottom-up planning projects lacks consistency which limits the overall effectiveness of MISO's transmission planning process.  Standardized data requirements for bottom-up planning projects will improve stakeholders ability to effectively participate in MISO's transmission planning process and lead to better outcomes for ratepayers.  

Transmission Owner feedback on MTEP Timing Adjustments to Incorporate Stakeholder Feedback (MTEP Selection of Transmission Alternatives) (IR091) (PAC-2021-4)

May 18, 2021

At the April 27, 2021 Planning Subcommittee (PSC) meeting, MISO reviewed stakeholder feedback submitted on IR091, MTEP Timing Adjustments to Incorporate Stakeholder Feedback (MTEP Selection of Transmission Alternatives) which has subsumed PAC-2021-4, and requested Stakeholder feedback on the new issue and the action MISO as proposed to take to address feedback submitted on the IR Issue:

• MISO agrees to the Alternatives submittal deadline of May 31st or SPM2, whichever occurs later
• MISO agrees to provide a WebEx platform for Stakeholders to request information and discuss alternatives to MTEP projects with Transmission Owners.  A maximum of two meetings will be allowed:
  • one between September 15^th and SPM1
  • the second between SPM1 and SPM2.

Scheduled only if requested by stakeholders

MISO’s involvement will be limited to providing the WebEx platform and facilitating the meetings

Transmission Owner Feedback:

Clarity is needed on whether MISO intends to host two Stakeholder meetings altogether or two meetings per project/Stakeholder; however the Transmission Owners feel that it would be more reasonable for MISO to schedule one meeting where all project alternatives are consolidated than to schedule meetings to discuss each project alternative submitted.  The Owners also suggest that MISO’s involvement include developing the topics or questions for discussion to prepare stakeholders for these meetings.

Regarding the proposal presented by MISO, consideration should be given to how the project review process can be effectively implemented with the number of projects submitted by each Transmission Owner each year, the number of potential alternatives that can be submitted by one or more Stakeholders, and the potential for projects in one Transmission Owners’ planning area to impact another.

Additionally, the timing of alternative project submission should be the sooner of May 31 or SPM 2, rather than the later of the two, as the 2^nd SPM is the most appropriate forum for consideration of alternatives to projects submitted by the Transmission Owners, as it is already dedicated to this purpose.