Reconsideration of Scoping Decision DENIED

September 29th, 2026

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission’s Order in the PowerOn Midwest docket (CN-25-117) denying the North Route Group and NO765MN’s Motion for Reconsideration is official:

PUC Denial Reconsideration Scoping Decision_20269-236935-01Download

This significantly limits what System Alternatives are evaluated in the Environmental Report. The Order states:

1) Staff may screen alternatives and impacts based on legal availability, relevance to the certificate of need decision, feasibility, availability, sufficiency of information, and ability to meet the stated need. This is consistent with Minnesota Rules 7849.1400 and 7849.0110.

    2) MISO determines the “need” and “purpose” of a project…and “the Commission may exclude from analysis any alternative that does not meet the underlying need for or purpose of the project . . .”; Minn. R. 7849.1400; and

    3) How can anyone provide “all supporting information” that the PUC deems “sufficient?” Minn. R. 7849.1400, subp. 6, requires an individual proposing an alternative route for study to submit all supporting information they would like the Commission to consider.”

    Then again, methinks there are some specifications MISO is requiring that are not covered by these limitations. We shall see…

    Posted by Carol A. Overland
    Filed in Energy, Land Use, Legislative & Policy, Political Sense (non?), Transmission
    Comments Off on Reconsideration of Scoping Decision DENIED

    Comments are closed.