Federal Energy Regulatory
D.C. Circuit keeps refund claims alive in MISO transmission case
The court said FERC can use a 9.98% replacement return rate, with interest, to calculate refunds on disputed transmission charges. That preserves years of billing exposure on the regional grid.
The D.C. Circuit said FERC can still order refunds on disputed MISO transmission charges, even after earlier rate orders were vacated. The ruling keeps backdated repayment alive for utilities and customers on the regional grid.
- FERC can still order refunds on disputed MISO transmission charges.
- The refunds are tied to a 9.98% replacement return rate.
- Interest can be included in the repayment.
- The ruling reaches back to old billing periods, not just future rates.
- Transmission owners still face refund exposure.
MISO customers still have a live shot at getting money back from transmission charges they already paid. On June 5, the D.C. Circuit said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, can use a 9.98% replacement return rate to calculate refunds on disputed Midcontinent Independent System Operator charges, and can add interest on top.
Why the court let the money reach back
The legal fight turned on whether FERC was doing something forbidden by reaching backward after earlier rate orders were thrown out. The court said this was different: FERC was correcting its own mistake after being reversed, and that gives the agency authority to order retroactive rate adjustments.
That mattered in two refund windows. The agency ordered refunds for the First Complaint proceeding’s 15-month period from Nov. 12, 2013, through Feb. 11, 2015, and for charges collected from Sept. 28, 2016, to the date of the order. In other words, the dispute is not just about tomorrow’s tariff sheet, but about money that has already been paid over years.
What stays on the line for utilities and customers
For households, businesses and cooperatives tied to the MISO grid, the ruling preserves a path to recover overcharges. For transmission owners, it leaves refund exposure in place and confirms that interest can be part of the repayment calculation.
The court said section 206 of the Federal Power Act still allows that kind of backward-looking fix, even though it follows stricter procedures than section 205. That keeps the remedy alive in one of the most expensive corners of the power market, where a rate set years ago can still come back to haunt the bill.