In the July 17, 2024, meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC), MISO shared draft BPM-015 and Attachment X language for Initial Commercial Operation Date in GIAs for stakeholder feedback.
Comments are due by August 7.
EDP Renewables (EDPR) expresses continued support to MISO’s solutions to address those projects nearing completion, but have experienced delays that extend well beyond the Commercial Operation Date (COD) in Generator Interconnection Agreements (GIAs). MISO correctly notes in the draft filing that many projects are prevented from meeting COD due to supply chain delays, restudies, and numerous additional factors outside the Interconnection Customer’s (ICs) control. As a result, a significant number of ICs must seek Individual waivers to extend the COD, which increase costs and cause further delays to late-stage projects in the queue.
MISO’s short-term blanket waiver and long-term tariff change to extend from three to five years beyond the COD are equitable solutions that directly address these issues by allowing projects to modify the COD without having to re-negotiate their GIAs. This will decrease the time projects stay in the interconnection study process and help meet increased demand to bring more Megawatts on the MISO system.
Cordelio Power appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on Initial Commercial Operation Date in GIAs as presented at the Planning Advisory Committee on July 17, 2024.
Cordelio supports MISO’s proposed tariff and manual changes as well as the timeline for filing and implementing policy changes.
Cordelio appreciates MISO’s collaboration with stakeholders to address the important issue of industry-wide project delays and identify and implement timely solutions.
EDF Renewables supports MISO's approach to provide a 2 year blanket COD extension for DPP-2018 and 2019 cycles and the long term approach granting additional time should the TO require it.
One comment we would like to offer is that the latest COD that can be requested in the application is too early. In the DPP-2023 cycle that queued up in 2024, the model year was 2028, which was the latest COD that a project could request and is only 4 years out from the date of application. This is an unrealistic COD right off the bat. For context, may TOs require timeline to construct (between GIA execution/funding to backfeed) of four years. The tariff provisions in the GIP that provide for a longer timeframe in cases where the design/procurement/construction are expected to take longer should be respected and allow projects to request CODs in a reasonable timeframe, not unnecessarily limited by the end of the model year build.
The Environmental Sector appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback regarding a proposed waiver and revisions to the Business Practice Manual (BPM) and/or Tariff related to Generator Interconnection Agreement Commercial Operation Dates. As noted in the presentation to the Planning Advisory Committee, Commercial Operations Dates (COD) may be impacted due to supply chain delays or other events outside of the control of the generator interconnection customer, MISO, or any other party. Allowing for a waiver to extend a COD will better enable generators to meet deadlines and come online, reducing overall costs and enabling more new generation resources. The Environmental Sector is supportive of MISO’s proposed changes.
SB Energy appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed changes to COD and ISD provisions in the Tariff and BPM-015.
SB Energy has submitted the below comments as part of IPWG discussion, but we did not receive responses to these comments or any changes to the proposal based on this feedback. Therefore, we are resubmitting the comments and concerns here again with PAC. Thank you for your consideration.
For the long-term proposal “Up to 3-year extension of Application COD during GIA negotiation,” MISO should consider giving flexibility to the Interconnection Customer to provide a COD that is more realistic at the time of GIA negotiation and should not tie any maximum period (such as 3 years) between Application COD and COD during GIA negotiation. Historically, we all know that there have been several study delays for the DPP cycles, and it is not clear at the time of Application entry when the project will obtain a GIA. Without knowing a firm GIA execution timeline, it is impossible to predict the COD at the time of application entry. Historical timelines between Application entry and GIA execution varies quite a bit (~3 to 5 years). Moreover, it is noteworthy that Transmission Owner In-Service Date is also a major factor in determining the COD of the project. At the time of GIA negotiation, there will be more details available about ISD and this will not be available at the time of Application entry to define a COD. The study delays and TO ISD are outside of Interconnection Customers’ control and hence this proposal “Up to 3-year extension of Application COD during GIA negotiation” should not limit to 3-year extension rather it should be a negotiated COD date based on all available info at the time of GIA signing without a maximum 3-year time period from the Application COD.
Regarding the proposal “Up to 3-year extension of original COD in executed GIA,” MISO should provide flexibility to the Interconnection Customer if the reasons for the COD delay are outside of Interconnection Customer’s control. For instance, if the delays are caused due to (1) permitting delays, (2) long lead times for breakers & other equipment, (3) In-Service Date delays by TO (TO delays could also be due to long lead times for breakers that is outside of TO’s control) etc., then MISO should allow COD extensions beyond 3 years provided that IC provides sufficient justification of the delays. MISO should consider adding language about this in BPM-015 and avoid having to file FERC waiver whenever these types of delays happen.
The MISO Transmission Owners (Owners) submit the following feedback in response to MISO’s Commercial Operations Date in GIAs as presented at the July 17 PAC.
The Owners appreciate MISO’s review of the In Service Date (ISD) and Commercial Operations Date requirements in GIAs. While the Owners appreciate the 2-year extension provision proposed to be granted to the TO during GIA negotiation, the Owners still have some concern with the TO’s maximum allowable ISD in the GIA being tied to the date the Interconnection Customer (IC) elects in the initial application. MISO provided an illustrative example showing the IC can elect an ISD up to 5 years from the DPP queue and MTEP planning year, however if the IC selects an ISD 1-2 years from the DPP queue, not taking into account current DPP study timelines which could be 3 to 5 years based on recent cycles, when the project moves to GIA negotiations, there could still be the circumstance where the maximum allowed date the TO can list as the ISD is not achievable. While there are provisions in the GIA the TO can utilize in this case, it is preferable not to execute an initial GIA with an ISD that is not known to be achievable. The Owners appreciate MISO’s efforts to reduce DPP study timelines, however until the desired reductions are achieved this concern persists. The Owners re-iterate the suggestion that the allowable date the TO can place the ISD in the GIA be referenced from the expected construction schedule provided in the interconnection facilities study rather than a date the IC elected upon entering the queue. ISDs established by the TO with reference to the Facilities Study prepared during DPP Phase 2 are more accurate because the study work allows the TO to identify ISDs informed by their experience and knowledge of supply chain timelines, regulatory and permitting processes, and outage requirements and their expectations of the time needed to design, procure, and install those facilities and place them in service.
Re: Orsted Onshore North America (Orsted) Feedback on July 17, 2024 Presentation on Proposed Changes to Commercial Operation Date in GIAs
Please accept the following comments in support of MISO’s July 17, 2024, presentation regarding Initial Commercial Operating Date (COD) and In-Service Date provisions in the Tariff. As related to the short-term reforms, Orsted supports MISO’s proposal to grant a blanket 2-year extension of the maximum allowable COD for all DPP 2018/2019 projects without any additional action needed by the project. This provision recognizes the challenges that all industries including the energy industry have faced in recent years with COVID-19, inflation, interest rates and supply chain among others. Providing a blanket extension of the maximum allowable COD for these projects creates regulatory efficiency by not requiring resources to seek individual exemptions and provides regulatory certainty. Orsted also appreciates the opportunity to review the draft waiver filing and suggests that MISO consider adding a date by which FERC should provide an order or language suggesting that FERC should issue an order as soon as possible. Language suggesting quick FERC action may act as an impetus for an order that will provide regulatory certainty for projects in the 2018/2019 DPP study groups.
Lopa Parikh, Orsted
RWE supports MISO proposal of COD waiver for short term solution for DPP 2018/2019 projects. RWE would like to provide feedback on the Long-term solution MISO proposed during the PAC meeting on 07/17/2024. MISO proposed provision for Transmission Owner In-Service date extension for additional 2 years beyond existing 3-year during the GIA negotiation. RWE believes it will be too early to determine whether the additional 2-year extension will be necessary during the negotiation period. RWE proposes to have the flexibility of applying the additional upto 2-year extension either during the GIA negotiation period or after the GIA is signed.
To: Planning Advisory Committee
From: The Entergy Operating Companies
Subject: BPM-015 and Attachment X Commercial Operations Date in GIA (PAC-2023-3) (20240717)
Date: August 7, 2024
The Entergy Operating Companies ("EOCs") appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft BPM-015 and Attachment X language regarding GIA Commercial Operations Date, presented in the July 17, 2024 Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Stakeholder meeting.
It is the EOC’s view that MISO’s proposed approach to GIP Section 4.4.4 is inconsistent with the other relevant provision of Attachment X. In particular, Section 3.3.1 provides:
The expected In-Service Date of the Generating Facility or MHVDC Transmission Line shall be no later than the process window for the Transmission Provider’s regional expansion planning period not to exceed seven years from the date the Interconnection Request is received by Transmission Provider, unless Interconnection Customer or MHVDC Connection Customer demonstrates that engineering, permitting and construction of the Generating Facility or MHVDC Transmission Line will take longer than the regional expansion planning period, nor shall it be any sooner than the process time described in the Generator Interconnection Procedures and confirmed in the PreQueue Phase.
Notwithstanding the italicized language, in the EOC’s experience MISO is requiring that the COD be no later than five years out from the stated year of the DPP cycle that the interconnection request is submitted to MISO, not seven years; and notwithstanding the underlined language, MISO is enforcing the 5-years-out COD requirement even if the expected lead time for the resource including engineering, permitting, and construction is longer than that. MISO’s proposal to amend Section 4.4.4 to allow for an additional two-year extension of the ISD during GIA negotiations, for a total ISD deadline of five years during the initial phase of the interconnection process, is inconsistent with Section 3.3.1, which by its terms allows for an ISD up to seven years from the interconnection request.