International Transmission Co., American Transmission Co., Ameren, Xcel, Entergy, Cleco and other transmission owners have asked FERC to suspend competitive bidding on transmission projects in MISO and SPP so the grid can be built out faster to accommodate the AI data center explosion.
The TOs argued in an April 7 complaint that MISO’s and SPP’s project solicitations impose “unjust and unreasonable” delays of 16 to 20 months — “just as harmful as broken permitting” — at a time when the U.S. “faces an unprecedented energy emergency and time is of the essence” (EL26-58). They characterized the grid operators’ competitive processes as a “morass” when demand is rising at rates not seen since World War II.
The group said FERC should either place a five-year moratorium on competitive bidding in MISO and SPP or exempt any transmission project needed to interconnect new generation or load from a solicitation process.
The collection of TOs, which includes Evergy, Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co., The Empire District Electric Co. and subsidiaries of ITC, Ameren and Xcel, calls itself the “Grid Acceleration Coalition.”
A pro-competition group, the Electricity Transmission Competition Coalition (ETCC), opposes the complaint, calling it “tone deaf” to concerns over ratepayer affordability.
“Without competition, a monopoly incumbent utility has zero incentive to reduce costs because the more they spend, the more their profits increase,” ETCC wrote.
The TOs asked FERC for fast-tracked treatment of their complaint by mid-July, before SPP would issue requests for proposals on two 765-kV projects from its 2025 Integrated Transmission Planning assessment: the Crawfish Draw-Woodward project and the Anthem-Seminole project in Texas and Oklahoma.
MISO’s and SPP’s competitive bidding processes inhibit the timely interconnection of loads and generation, hampering utilities’ ability to connect customers, preventing FERC from fulfilling its duty under the Federal Power Act to ensure access to electricity, and handicapping the race to develop advanced AI, the group argued.
The TOs cast doubt on claims that competition ultimately saves customers money, arguing that actual costs of projects exceed winning bids by 59 to 66%.
“The benefits of solicitations in MISO and SPP are (at best) unproven and, in all events, do not outweigh the certain harms from delay in those regions,” they wrote in the joint complaint. “Winners can promise the moon and then, after prevailing in the yearslong and opaque administrative process, leverage exceptions and escalators to blow through bids.”
The coalition predicted that competitive developers and their supporters would respond to the complaint with their “usual talking points” about the cost savings associated with Order 1000. But it said reviews of actual construction costs show anticipated savings have not appeared.
To submit a commentary on this topic, email forum@rtoinsider.com.
“Competitive developers will have their anecdotes — of solicited projects completed on time and under budget, and of directly assigned projects that incurred delays or overruns. The coalition can meet those stories with examples of its own — solicited projects that are delayed for years and bust their budgets, and directly assigned that are completed timely and under budget,” the coalition said. “Building transmission is hard, and delays and cost increases are sometimes unavoidable. The important point, however, is that no publicly available study to date supports the proposition that solicitations systematically reduce construction costs or delays in MISO and SPP, accounting for differences across projects.”
The group reasoned that directly assigning transmission projects needed to connect new data center load would improve ratepayer affordability, given the White House’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge, which seven major technology companies reportedly signed on to. It said now that hyperscalers have committed to paying their fair share, bringing large loads online faster would help dilute costs among new customers.
The complaint argued that “bureaucratic red tape” brought on by MISO’s and SPP’s application of FERC Order 1000 “harms national security and economic growth.” It said electricity availability is the “binding constraint” to realizing the U.S.’s AI potential.
“And if we are serious about winning the AI race, that looming need must be solved now. If we choose in 2026 to add two years of delay to transmission projects in MISO and SPP, we will seriously undermine our nation’s ability to meet that challenge,” the coalition said, referencing its 16- to 20-month figure. It said the most “consequential” AI technologies likely would be developed between 2028 and 2035.
Among other projects, the coalition pointed to MISO’s 345-kV Wisconsin Southeast long-range transmission project, which was partially accelerated due to large loads. MISO reassigned some substation work associated with the project to incumbent ATC after originally awarding it to Chicago-based developer Viridon Midcontinent. (See MISO Reassigns Competitive Substation Project to ATC on Data Center Rush.)
The TOs said instead of MISO letting ATC take the lead without delay, the RTO assigned the project to a “nonincumbent developer — one with vanishingly little experience and not even authorized to operate in Wisconsin.”
The TO coalition added that it seeks “prospective relief limited to MISO and SPP” and isn’t asking FERC to rescind any projects that MISO or SPP already awarded to developers or reverse in-the-works solicitation processes.
MISO said it is reviewing the complaint and will file its response at FERC in the coming weeks.
Pro-competition Group Calls Complaint ‘Tone Deaf’
In an April 7 statement, the ETCC condemned the complaint and said it flies in the face of the Ratepayer Protection Pledge and President Donald Trump’s executive order to reduce anti-competitive regulatory barriers.
The organization said its data show that six recent winning bids in SPP reduced costs on average by 21% from the RTO’s estimate, and eight MISO winning bids lowered the RTO’s cost estimate by an average of 38%.
“The complaint is tone deaf to the electricity affordability crisis facing Americans. Suspending competition for five years in MISO and SPP would expose consumers in these regions to unchecked cost escalation for years, guaranteeing higher utility bills,” ETCC Chair Paul Cicio said. “MISO and SPP competitive transmission projects have been shown to have a better track record of adhering to cost containment and completion schedules than noncompetitive projects. A moratorium would move us backward at precisely the wrong time.”
ETCC said it will urge the U.S. Department of Justice to review the complaint.
