MISO state regulators are considering asking the RTO to keep tabs on resource adequacy risk indicators as they contemplate crafting a replacement standard in the footprint.
During a Feb. 6 meeting dedicated to the topic, members of the Organization of MISO States (OMS) were clear they should preside over development of a possible new resource adequacy standard in the RTO. They proposed that MISO’s ongoing RA analysis could become a regular occurrence and help regulators decide when to substitute other benchmarks for the one-day-in-10-years loss-of-load standard.
MISO toyed with the idea of replacing or modifying the one-in-10 standard that its loss-of-load expectation study relies on. The grid operator suggested using conditional value at risk, loss-of-load hours or expected unserved energy as possible new measures of risk but has said it is not attached to any approach and is open to other ideas. (See MISO Dips Toes into Potential New Resource Adequacy Standard; States Demand Key Role.)
The RTO paused its formal work on a revised metric in 2025. Wisconsin Public Service Commissioner Marcus Hawkins said OMS expressed a desire for MISO to “tap the brakes and understand the topic more” before drawing up hypotheticals on different standards. He told fellow regulators that MISO is “waiting on us to steer the ship on this one.”
Hawkins said it is time to communicate to MISO what regulators might want to explore and “establish guardrails” that respect state jurisdiction over resource planning.
“There’s a potential if you change the resource adequacy metrics, that you change the requirements,” Hawkins said. “Because we encouraged MISO to pump the brakes … it’s now the time to collect our thoughts in a coherent way.”
MISO is currently working on gap analysis, which seeks to capture risks that the existing loss-of-load metric might be missing. OMS expects to review the RTO’s analysis later in 2026.
Over time, MISO expects risk to dwindle until it barely registers in the summer months, while winter mornings present challenges.
Werner Roth, economist with the Public Utility Commission of Texas, said OMS members need to examine what the gap analysis shows “five [to] 10 years from now.”
“Do we start to see a deviation as the resource mix changes?” he asked rhetorically.
He said state regulators must have the last word on which resource adequacy standard MISO pursues. “We need to have the ultimate say in that. Anything less would be unacceptable.”
Hawkins said OMS could direct MISO to continue tracking resource adequacy metrics from its footprint-wide vantage point so regulators know when they should change course on standards. The RTO would need to “produce a predictable source of information” that could potentially help regulators see risks that have not previously been obvious. He added that MISO would be creating probabilistic, forward-looking studies and said inputs into those studies should be well understood among regulators so there is no distrust and “we can have faith in the results.”
Bill Booth, a consultant to the Mississippi Public Service Commission, asked if OMS should secure a third-party consultant to serve as a check on MISO’s analysis results.
Hawkins said OMS could entertain the idea and that it has been in consultation with and gathering expertise from the National Laboratories. Representatives from some of the labs will appear at the organization’s Resource Adequacy Summit in May, he said.
“We sort of got a line of sight on some of those experts,” Hawkins said.
Hawkins also said OMS will be privy to other expert views because a new RA standard would be vetted through MISO’s Resource Adequacy Subcommittee. He said OMS members would benefit from the larger stakeholder community’s views.
