Multiple transmission owners have questioned the need behind a suggestion that MISO work more checks into its process for reviewing troubled transmission projects.

MISO transmission customers have asked MISO to use a 20% cost overrun on transmission projects in progress to trigger the RTO’s variance analyses. That would take the place of the RTO’s existing 25% over-budget threshold. MISO uses its variance analysis to reassess transmission projects that experience significant cost increases or other obstacles.

The group of transmission customers asked MISO to involve its Board of Directors with project reviews and decisions on transmission projects. They’ve also suggested MISO draw on third-party experts to decide projects’ fate.

After it wraps up a variance analysis, MISO can decide either to let projects stand as-is, develop a mitigation plan for them, cancel projects or assign them to different developers if possible.

At a Nov. 18 stakeholder cost allocation meeting, Ken Stark, with the Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers, said that although transmission construction is needed, it must be done in an affordable manner. Stark has advocated for tighter rules around the variance analysis since late 2024. (See End Users Push MISO for More Intensive Cost Overrun Evals on Tx Projects.)

“It’s top of mind for regulators right now,” Stark reasoned. He pointed out that SPP uses a 20% cost overrun to trigger reviews.

ITC’s Cynthia Crane criticized the proposal for borrowing some of SPP’s transmission cost containment process while ignoring key components. For instance, she said the 20% threshold SPP uses to re-examine projects is applied later, only after cost estimates are much more concrete than MISO’s preliminary estimates.

Further, Crane said the SPP board is much more directly involved with day-to-day operations, having to sign off on tariff changes before they’re submitted to FERC. The MISO board, on the other hand, takes a self-proclaimed “noses in, fingers out” governance approach, she said.

Stark said the board could have a “discreet and focused” role that doesn’t drastically expand its authority.

MISO’s Jeremiah Doner said the RTO provides frequent updates on the status of transmission projects. He said the board is not “hands off” when it comes to transmission development.

Stark said it then “makes sense” for the board to have a say in transmission projects that have hit a snag, given that the board approves MISO’s annual transmission expansion plans.

Crane said MISO’s End-Use Customer sector is “cherry picking” pieces of SPP’s process.

“I fail to see how the proposal you’re proposing is adequate,” Ameren’s Justin Stewart added.

Other stakeholders said MISO’s 25% cost overrun threshold had stakeholder backing and would be more appropriate than borrowing another RTO’s approach just for the sake of it.

The Planning Advisory Committee will take written stakeholder opinions on the proposed variance analysis edits through early December and hold a special meeting on Dec. 16 for further discussion on the topic.