Studies and Reports > 2025 Biennial Report > Transmission Projects Report 2025

6.0 Needs

6.1 Introduction

Chapter 6 contains information on each of the present and reasonably foreseeable future inadequacies identified in the six transmission zones. First, for each zone, a table of present inadequacies is presented. The table is ordered by when the inadequacy was first identified, so the older inadequacies are listed first. Following the table of inadequacies, a discussion of each pending project, by Tracking Number, is provided. Finally, a table of completed projects is included.

6.1.1 Needed Projects

For each transmission planning zone, the discussion begins with a table that looks like this.

The following describes the information is found in each of the columns.

MPUC Tracking Number

The first column in the table is labeled “MPUC Tracking Number.” Each inadequacy is assigned a Tracking Number. This numbering system was created in 2005 and has been utilized in every report since. The Tracking Number has three parts to it: the year the inadequacy was first reported, the zone in which it occurs, and a chronological number assigned in no particular order. Tracking Number 2015-NE-N10, for example, indicates this matter is first reported in the 2015 Report and is an inadequacy in the Northeast Zone. An inadequacy with a Tracking Number beginning with 2017, on the other hand, was first identified in the 2017 Report.

MISO Project Name

The second column contains the MISO Project Name for each project. This is the name used in the pertinent MTEP Report for that project. In some cases, for projects that were first identified in earlier years and are still under development, the MISO Project Name may not be exactly the same as the name given in an earlier biennial report, but the project is the same.

MTEP Year & Appendix

The third column contains a reference to a MTEP Report and an Appendix in the report. The MTEP Report is prepared annually by MISO, and each utility that is a member of MISO must participate in the MTEP process. Each report is referred to by the year it is adopted. Thus, the most recent report is MTEP25, although it won’t be finally approved by MISO until the end of the year. Additional information about the MISO planning process and the MTEP reports is included in Section 3.3.1 of this Biennial Report, and an explanation of how to find a particular MTEP Report and an Appendix is provided in subsection 6.2.

MTEP Project Number

The fourth column of the table provides a Project Number assigned by MISO for each project. This Project Number is important for finding a particular project in the appropriate MTEP Report. The only utility reporting transmission needs in this biennial report that is not a member of MISO is Minnkota Power Cooperative, and all the MPC projects are in the Northwest Zone. The other non-MISO utilities are East River Electric Power Cooperative (EREPC), and L&O Power Cooperative (L&O), but these utilities are not reporting any transmission needs in this report.

As shown in the table in section 6.3.1, the Minnkota Power Cooperative projects are shown to be “Non-MISO” projects in column three of the table of Needed Projects. Nonetheless, several of these “Non-MISO” projects do include an MTEP Project Number in column four. The reason for this is even though Minnkota is not a MISO member. MISO performs some of Minnkota’s transmission planning work.

Certificate Of Need (CON)

The MPUC rules state the biennial report shall contain an approximate timeframe for filing a CON application for any projects identified that are large enough to require a CON.¹⁹ This column provides a simple “Yes” or “No” indication of whether a CON is required. If a CON has already been applied for, the MPUC Docket Number for that filing can be found in the discussion for that particular project. If a Docket Number is given, that docket can be checked to determine whether the CON has already been issued by the Commission.

Non-wires Alternative

This column provides a “Yes” or “No” indication as to whether a non-wires alternative is potentially viable for the identified inadequacy. Section 2.7 of this Report provides a summary of the types of non-wires alternatives able to address certain categories of inadequacies. Where a non- wires alternative was considered, further discussion of the alternative is included in the narrative provided for that particular project.

Utility

This column simply identifies the utility or utilities involved in the project.

1. Description of Each Project by Tracking Number

In the 2005, 2007, and 2009 Biennial Reports, the utilities provided a separate subsection for each pending project by Tracking Number and included certain information about each project. In the 2011 and 2013 Report, those discussions were eliminated because the Commission had understandably authorized the utilities to rely on the MTEP Reports to provide all the necessary information regarding each project, because transmission facility approval was being conducted by and through MISO.

19 Minn. R. 7848.1300 § M.

6.1.2  Description of Each Project by Tracking Number

In the 2005, 2007, and 2009 Biennial Reports, the utilities provided a separate subsection for each pending project by Tracking Number and included certain information about each project. In the 2011 and 2013 Report, those discussions were eliminated because the Commission had understandably authorized the utilities to rely on the MTEP Reports to provide all the necessary information regarding each project, because transmission facility approval was being conducted by and through MISO.

In 2014, as part of its approval of the 2013 Biennial Report, the Commission determined perhaps the MTEP Reports did not satisfy one requirement of the state statute to “identify [in the biennial report] general economic, environmental, and social issues associated with each alternative.”²⁰ The utilities did not object to providing that information in the 2015 Report, but would raise the caveat that for many of the projects, particularly those several years into the future, detailed information is often not available at this stage of development of the project. Also, for many smaller projects, like replacing a transformer, there are no likely alternatives available and not much information is available.

To assist the Commission, and other readers of the report, the utilities have included in this Biennial Report a separate discussion of various matters relating to each project, even though nearly all that information can be found in the MTEP Reports. As part of this discussion, the utilities provide available information on the general impacts associated with the project. In those cases where a certificate of need or a routing permit or both have been applied for, or even granted, most of this type of information is available in the records created in those dockets, and a reference to the MPUC Docket Number is provided. Any reader desiring in-depth information about a project that has been approved or is being considered by the Commission can review the record in that matter for more detailed information.

20 Minn. Stat. §216B.2425, subd. 2(c)(3).

6.1.3  Completed Projects

The table for Completed Projects is similar to the table for Needed Projects described above.

Most of the columns contain the same information provided for the ongoing projects. However, the last column provides the date the project was completed, and the second column contains a more precise description of the project than just the MISO title. If a certificate of need or a route permit or both were required from the Commission, the docket numbers are provided in the last column. While the last column is entitled “Date Completed,” in some cases the project is being removed from the list because the need once perceived is no longer present, and the project is being withdrawn. Readers interested in more information about a completed project can consult earlier Biennial Reports, the MTEP Report, or the MPUC Docket, whichever are applicable.

6.2  The MISO Planning Process

6.2.1 The MISO Transmission Expansion Plan Report

Because nearly all the projects identified in this Report are being undertaken by utilities that are members of MISO, this subsection is provided to assist the reader in finding information about the MISO planning process and the annual MTEP Report prepared each year. Much of the information provided in this subsection was also available in the 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2023 Biennial Reports.

The latest MTEP Reports are available on the MISO webpage at:

http://www.misoenergy.org (Click on “Planning” on the top of the page)

The MTEP process is ongoing at all times at MISO. Generally, utilities submit a list of their newly proposed projects in September. MISO staff evaluates these projects over the next several months, and prepares a draft of the annual MTEP Report around July of the following year. After review by utilities and other interested parties, the MISO board of directors approves the report, usually in December. The process continues with another report finalized the following December. The MTEP25 Report should be approved by the MISO Board of Directors in December of this year.

Each of the MTEP Reports separates transmission projects into two categories and lists them in Appendices as follows:

Appendix A – Projects recommended for approval;
Appendix B – Projects with documented need and effectiveness and long lead time making them not needing approval immediately.

Generally, as projects are first identified, they are listed in Appendix B, and then they move up to Appendix A as they are further studied and ultimately brought forth for construction. Some projects never advance to the final stage – Appendix A – of actually being approved and constructed.

The MTEP Report is an excellent source of information about ongoing transmission studies and projects in Minnesota and throughout a wide area of the country.

• The MTEP Report is prepared annually, so it provides very timely information. The Biennial Report is prepared only every other year.
• The MISO planning process is comprehensive. MISO considers all regional transmission issues, not just Minnesota transmission issues.
• MISO conducts an independent review and analysis of all projects to confirm the benefits stated by the project sponsor. This adds further verification of the benefits of projects.
• MISO holds various planning meetings during the year at which stakeholders can have input into the planning process, so there are more frequent opportunities for input (see next paragraph.)
• All completed projects are listed on the MISO webpage.
• Not duplicating the MTEP Report will save ratepayers money. It is costly to require the utilities to produce all the information found in the MTEP Report.