← Research and insights

Michigan utility decisions · October 7, 2026

Michigan Act 30
and the MPSC

A new line. A higher bill. A huge new customer.
Who decides, who pays, and how you can participate.

Act 30 governs transmission siting. The Commission's broader work reaches rates, pipelines, renewable facilities, large-load contracts, and the service people rely on.

Find your projectRead the 39-page report ↓Watch the explainers
5 mi + 345 kVBoth inclusive Act 30 size thresholds
1 yearAct 30 decision clock after filing
October 21Proposed-rule hearing and comments
Explore the companion guidesGas and petroleum pipelines →Solar, wind, and batteries →The MPSC and public process →

Two ways to begin

Watch the explanation.

Begin with the law and the agency: what Act 30 covers, what the MPSC does, and how its decisions affect you. The full video focuses on electric transmission: public benefits, feasible and reasonable routes, competing objectives, and the evidence behind a route comparison.

Start here

The vertical Short

1 minute 21 seconds

Watch· 1:21
Watch on YouTube ↗TranscriptCaptions

Both videos include captions and downloadable transcripts.

Start with the decision

What affects you?

One project can have several approvals. Choose a concern to find the relevant law and the next useful record.

7 pathways
01

Act 30

A power line near my land

May the line follow this route?

Check the owner, construction type, voltage, and length. Eligible new major lines meet both thresholds: at least five miles and 345 kV. Smaller lines can seek a section 9 certificate.

Your next step

Get the route map and case schedule. Affected owners and municipalities have intervention rights.

2 3 4 7

02

Rate and cost recovery proceedings

A higher utility bill

Which costs may the utility recover?

A rate case tests the revenue request, investment, financing, and allocation among customers. Your own bill depends on your tariff and use. Municipal utilities and member-regulated cooperatives have rate exceptions.

Your next step

Find your utility's rate order and rate schedule. Separate total annual revenue from your bill.

1 15 16

03

Tariffs, special contracts, plans, and cost recovery

A data center or large factory

Who pays if demand changes or the customer leaves?

Look at contracted demand, ramp-up, minimum billing, dedicated facilities, collateral, and termination payments. A service contract is separate from the project's land-use, water, and environmental approvals.

Your next step

Follow the contract docket and later rate, supply-cost, and resource-planning proceedings.

17 20 21

04

Acts 9 and 16 of 1929

A pipeline project

Is the pipeline needed, reasonably routed, and safe?

Intrastate natural gas siting uses Act 9. Crude oil and petroleum pipeline siting uses Act 16. Interstate natural gas siting is a federal FERC matter. Safety oversight is another layer.

Your next step

Identify the commodity, operator, new right-of-way, and state or federal docket.

25 26 27 38

05

PA 233 state siting option and local process

Solar, wind, or battery storage

Does the state siting pathway apply?

The option covers solar at 50 MW or more, wind at 100 MW or more, and storage at 50 MW or more with at least 200 MWh of discharge capability. Local-process conditions and statutory triggers also apply.

Your next step

Check size, the local ordinance and process, the application, and intervention deadlines.

23 24 40

06

Service, reliability, distribution, and rate proceedings

Outages or local wire upgrades

What must the utility improve, and who pays?

Distribution plans address local wires and investment. Resource plans address future supply. Reliability standards and emergency procedures address service and response. A plan is distinct from approved cost recovery.

Your next step

Use circuit and outage evidence. Identify the plan, reliability case, and financial decision.

1 35 21 19

07

Telecommunications and video franchise laws

Phone or cable service

Does the MPSC have authority over this dispute?

Oversight includes wireline and provider disputes and certain cable matters. Michigan no longer regulates retail telecom rates. Cellular, broadband, and internet services are generally excluded; some associated issues overlap with regulated functions.

Your next step

Check the service and issue. Satellite and streaming are outside the stated MPSC authority.

37

The transmission certificate

Act 30 asks about
benefits, a route, and safety.

For an eligible new major line, the MPSC must find that public benefits justify construction, the route is feasible and reasonable, and health and safety are protected. The applicant must accept any conditions. 7

Check the two size tests

The legal definition includes five miles or more and 345 kV or more. Owner eligibility and construction exclusions also apply. 2 3

Both size tests are met.

Check eligible ownership and the proposed construction. This is a size screen, not a complete legal determination.

Below either threshold, a section 9 certificate may still be sought. Repairs, replacements, improvements, and added circuits have statutory exclusions. 3 4

Diagram showing that both five miles and 345 kV are inclusive thresholds, with examples above and below them.
Exactly five miles counts. A long 138 kV line fails the voltage test; a four-mile 345 kV line fails the length test.
01

Public benefits

Quantifiable and nonquantifiable benefits must justify construction.

02

A feasible and reasonable route

Engineering, corridor constraints, impacts, and alternatives need evidence.

03

Health and safety

The line must not present an unreasonable threat.

04

Accepted conditions

The applicant must accept conditions in a conditional grant.

From legal findings to comparable evidence

A shorter route can have larger impacts.

Feasibility asks whether an alignment can work. Reasonableness asks whether its choice is justified by the record and alternatives. A score helps explain competing objectives; it does not decide either legal finding.

Engineering and corridors

  • Length and heavy-angle structures
  • Road, rail, and stream crossings
  • Existing transmission, road, and rail corridors
  • Access, terrain, soils, and clearances
  • Airports and aviation constraints
  • Land rights, corridor width, and design-based cost

Environment and land

  • Wetlands, hydric soils, and floodplain
  • Forest clearing and agricultural land
  • Open water and designated streams
  • Protected areas and habitat
  • Wellhead protection areas
  • Contamination, storage tanks, brownfields, and dams

People and places

  • Dwelling locations and consistent distance bands
  • Schools, hospitals, and other sensitive sites
  • Cultural, historic, and cemetery resources
  • Views and landscape effects
  • Local land use and zoning
  • Source coverage and unmeasured impacts

These are evidence categories, not a statutory checklist or a claim that every layer is complete. The Oneida–Sabine method groups related concerns and discloses missing information. Wetland and hydric indicators can overlap; new-corridor penalties can duplicate co-location credits.

Try the comparison

What changes when length gets more weight?

Four invented routes use the same measurements. Each quantity is divided by a stated scale: 15 miles, 20 homes, and 16 wetland acres. The remaining weight is split equally between homes and wetlands.

Homes: 33.3% · Wetlands: 33.3%

B has the lowest illustrated score: 0.525.

Invented routes · Lower score is better in this model
RouteMilesHomesWetland acresScore
A1018140.814
B12860.525
C1520161.000
D111090.599

C is worse on all three measurements than A, B, and D. It is dominated under this example. A, B, and D have competing advantages. The legal decision still needs the unmeasured constraints and full record.

Show what drives the result

Publish raw quantities, scales, weights, category budgets, and contribution breakdowns. Test uncertain layers and different priorities. A winning share from a weight sweep depends on the sampled weights.

State the comparison boundary

Named routes and all graph paths are different populations. A divergence-and-rejoin window answers a local question. Report whole-route results too, and explain how the window was chosen.

Download the illustrative inputs and calculations → · These are not actual Oneida–Sabine route measurements.

Read the certificate findings, application requirements, and voluntary guidance alongside the analytical example. 7 6 10

Before the route is final

Affected owners and municipalities can intervene.

A public comment identifies a concern. Intervention gives an eligible participant a formal role in the contested evidence process, with duties and deadlines. Follow the case's actual schedule. 7 36

A certificate can take precedence over conflicting local restrictions and have effects in later proceedings. It does not set your easement payment. 8

  1. Before filingPublic meetings; identify route information and local constraints.
  2. Application and noticeGet maps, studies, and the procedural schedule.
  3. Evidence and alternativesSupport a route with comparable engineering and cost assumptions.
  4. The Commission's orderRead the approved route, conditions, and later obligations.

Follow the money

A route decision and
a bill decision are different.

A certificate includes an estimated cost. Rate and cost recovery proceedings test financial treatment. Federal transmission cost allocation has its own role. 7 15 39

A request becomes a tested revenue decision.

DTE Electric's U-21860 order authorized $242.406 million in additional annual revenue after an initial request of about $574.1 million and a revised request of $562.6 million. 16

The authorized amount is about 42.2% of the original request. Those are utility-wide annual revenue figures. Your household bill depends on its tariff and use.

Download the comparison data ↓
Three bars: initial request $574.1 million, revised request $562.6 million, authorized increase $242.4 million per year.
U-21860, February 19, 2026. Annual revenue increase, not an individual bill increase.

Saline Township · DTE · U-21990

1,383 MW changes the scale.
The contract determines who carries the exposure.

The December 18, 2025 order conditionally approved special contracts with safeguards. It places remaining liability on DTE if customer payments and collateral do not cover the exposure. These obligations require follow-through; they do not prove actual future recovery or promise that bills can never rise. 17

Customer commitment

Approximately 19-year supply agreement; minimum billing demand.

Exit and default

Termination payments, parent guaranty, and a letter of credit.

Remaining costs

Responsibility assigned to DTE under the order's conditions.

Try the arithmetic

Capacity is not annual consumption.

At full contracted capacity for a year, average use changes the energy total. Move the slider to see the calculation. This is an illustration, not a forecast.

10.90TWh per year

1,383 MW × 8,760 hours × assumed use ÷ 1,000,000

Assumes all contracted capacity is available for the full year. Omits ramp-up, outages, and curtailment. The 80% minimum billing demand is a financial term, not an annual-energy promise. 17

Download the illustrative scenarios ↓
Illustrative annual energy of 7.27, 9.69, 10.90, and 12.12 TWh at assumed average use of 60, 80, 90, and 100 percent.
MW measures power. MWh measures energy over time. Storage power alone does not establish its duration.

Service in an emergency

Who loses power first?

U-22059 approved modified DTE tariff terms for shedding qualifying large loads before other customers when that would prevent firm load shedding for those customers. Check the tariff's eligibility and conditions. 19

A separate large-load design

Google in Van Buren Township

U-22058's October 1, 2026 decision uses a primary supply agreement and a clean capacity accelerator agreement, with conditions and reporting. It is a different contract record from Saline. 20

Current through October 7, 2026

Know what is in force
and what is proposed.

The filing guidelines, proposed rules, and highway bill have different legal status. They address different parts of the process.

Adopted · voluntary

U-21930

Act 30 filing guidelines

Adopted January 29, 2026 for applications filed from April 29. Recommendations cover engagement, invitations, notice, routes, and existing corridors. 10

Proposed · not effective

U-22064

Administrative filing rules

Proposed R 460.51–460.58 would require engagement and route information, including priority for existing rights-of-way in scoring. Later adoption and effective dates need verification. 11

Pending legislation

HB 5940

Limited access highway utility use

The House-passed bill would change aboveground collocation rules. Official history shows Senate committee referral, with no enactment in the October 7 review. 13

Selected differences that affect participation
SubjectVoluntary guidelinesU-22064 proposal
Meeting timingSix-month lead recommendedSix-month lead would be required
Notice after filingBroader tiered radius recommendedSpecified affected-property set and maps
Route suggestionsConsider reasonable changesConsider and document reasonable changes
Existing rights-of-wayPriority in weighting and scoring recommendedPriority in scoring would be mandatory
Party alternatives45 days after prehearing recommendedThat provision not found in proposed text

Meeting invitations and application notice are separate phases. Neither column replaces the current statute. 5 7 10 11

The highway question

Beside a road and inside its right-of-way are different.

Act 30 tests the route. Highway law and transportation approvals determine whether a utility can occupy highway land. An existing-corridor preference does not supply an MDOT permit or prove available width. 7 12 14

Read the detailed HB 5940 analysis →
Diagram separating transmission route certification, highway occupancy, applicable standards, pending legislation, filing rules, and land rights.
A highway route requires evidence of width, access, safety, permissions, and future road constraints.

Go to the record

Explore the cases.

These selected proceedings show how different decisions work. They are not a complete inventory, a construction-status tracker, or a finding about pending appeals.

10 selected cases

U-22064 ↗Rulemaking

Proposed Act 30 filing rules

Hearing October 21 at 10 a.m. ET; written comments due 5 p.m. ET. Proposed, not effective rules.

Orders and archive metadata

Archive status: Open. This does not establish construction or appeal status. Checked 2026-10-07.

U-22059 ↗Large loads

DTE emergency load shedding

Modified tariff terms approved August 27, 2026 for qualifying large loads.

Orders and archive metadata

Archive status: Closed. This does not establish construction or appeal status. Checked 2026-10-07.

U-22058 ↗Large loads

Google / DTE contracts

Contracts approved with conditions October 1, 2026; distinct from Saline.

Orders and archive metadata

Archive status: Closed. This does not establish construction or appeal status. Checked 2026-10-07.

U-21932 ↗Renewable siting

Acceleration Solar

August 27, 2026 settlement approval for a 90 MW project under PA 233.

Orders and archive metadata

Archive status: Closed. This does not establish construction or appeal status. Checked 2026-10-07.

U-22248 ↗Pipelines

Consumers Line 300 reroute

Filed September 28, 2026. The API returned no Commission order as of October 7.

Orders and archive metadata

Archive status: Open. This does not establish construction or appeal status. Checked 2026-10-07.

No Commission order returned in this API snapshot.

Download source-linked case data ↓

Questions people ask

The distinctions that matter.

Does Act 30 regulate data centers?

Act 30 concerns transmission certificates. A line serving a data center may involve Act 30, while the customer's electric contract, rates, resource needs, local zoning, and other permits use their own processes. 2 17 21

Does exactly five miles count?

Yes. MCL 460.562(g) says five miles or more, paired with at least 345 kV and the specified owner categories. Check construction exclusions too. The statutory language is more precise than the MPSC overview's paraphrase. 2 3

Can I participate if the route affects my property?

Act 30 gives affected landowners and municipalities full intervenor status as of right. Follow the docket's procedural requirements and deadlines. A public comment does not automatically make you a party in the evidentiary process. 7 36

Does a certificate settle my easement payment?

No. A certificate has specified legal effects on route approval, local conflicts, and related proceedings. Land rights and compensation remain distinct questions. The route proceeding can determine issues that matter later. 8

Does the Saline order guarantee my bill will fall?

The order assigns customer-caused costs and remaining exposure to the customer or DTE under its conditions. Applicant projections of bill benefits are not a guarantee of a future household bill. Actual costs and allocation still need monitoring. 17

Does highway paralleling mean a line is in highway right-of-way?

No. A line beside a road may lie on private land. Highway occupation needs its own permissions and applicable standards. Act 30 route certification and highway occupation are distinct decisions. 7 12 14

Are U-22064's rules already binding?

As of October 7, 2026, they are proposed. U-21930 contains adopted voluntary guidelines. The U-22064 hearing and written-comment deadline are October 21; later adoption and effective dates need another check. 10 11

Read and check the evidence

The report, data,
and primary sources.

Public records reviewed through October 7, 2026. The selected court authorities include the 2017 Oshtemo order and earlier transmission opinions; this is not a comprehensive citator review.

PDF report ↓39 pages

Ten chapters, diagrams, insets, source citations, and a practical project guide.

Primary-source register ↓45 authorities

Source links, legal status, and the date checked.

Calculation inputs ↓Explicit assumptions

DTE annual-revenue comparison and illustrative energy scenarios.

Original read act 30 document page

Read Act 30 ↗

Definition · PDF page 2

Original read the rate decision document page

Read the rate decision ↗

Revenue finding · PDF page 374

Original read the saline conditions document page

Read the Saline conditions ↗

Remaining liability · PDF page 41

Original read the rulemaking notice document page

Read the rulemaking notice ↗

Hearing and comments · PDF page 2

Open the numbered source register
  1. 1
    MPSC regulatory responsibilities ↗

    agency overview · Checked 2026-10-07

  2. 2
    Act 30, section 2: definitions ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  3. 3
  4. 4
    Act 30, section 9: elective certification ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  5. 5
    Act 30, section 6: pre-application meetings ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  6. 6
    Act 30, section 7: application contents ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
    Act 30, section 14: administrative rules ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  10. 10
    MPSC U-21930, O-013620, 2026-01-29 ↗

    pp. 55–56; Attachment A, guidelines 2.1–2.10, 3.1–3.2, 4.10–4.12 · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  11. 11
    MPSC U-22064, October 1, 2026 order and notice of hearing ↗

    pp. 1–3; Exhibits A and B, proposed R 460.51–460.58 · proposed rules · Checked 2026-10-07

  12. 12
  13. 13
    Michigan HB 5940 (2026), House-passed text and history ↗

    pending bill; history rechecked · Checked 2026-10-07

  14. 14
    MDOT Utility Accommodation Guidance, section 5.6 ↗

    agency policy; saved sibling copy · Checked 2026-10-07

  15. 15
  16. 16
    MPSC U-21860, O-013626, 2026-02-19 ↗

    pp. 1–2; revenue deficiency and final ordering provisions · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  17. 17
    MPSC U-21990, O-013583, 2025-12-18 ↗

    pp. 4–8, 31–42, and ordering provisions · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  18. 18
    MPSC U-21990, O-013672, 2026-03-27 ↗

    order denying rehearing, reopening, and contested proceeding · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  19. 19
    MPSC U-22059, O-013814, 2026-08-27 ↗

    approved DTE emergency tariff revisions · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  20. 20
    MPSC U-22058, O-013923, 2026-10-01 ↗

    conditional primary supply and clean capacity accelerator agreements · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  21. 21
    MCL 460.6t: integrated resource planning ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  22. 22
    MPSC resource planning and regional transmission project reports ↗

    agency overview and reports · Checked 2026-10-07

  23. 23
    MPSC Act 233 general siting questions ↗

    agency overview · Checked 2026-10-07

  24. 24
  25. 25
  26. 26
    Act 9 of 1929: natural gas pipelines ↗

    current law · Checked 2026-10-07

  27. 27
  28. 28
    In re Application of Michigan Electric Transmission Co, 309 Mich App 1 (2015) ↗

    printed pp. 1–21; read with the 2017 Supreme Court order · published appellate opinion · Checked 2026-10-07

  29. 29
    Michigan Supreme Court, Oshtemo v METC, No. 150695, May 12, 2017 ↗

    p. 1: narrow constitutional ground for affirmance · Supreme Court order · Checked 2026-10-07

  30. 30
    In re International Transmission Co, 298 Mich App 338 (2012) ↗

    printed pp. 338–355; expedited wind transmission certification · published appellate opinion · Checked 2026-10-07

  31. 31
  32. 32
    In re Application of Antrim Shale Formation Regarding Operation of Wells, 319 Mich App 175 (2017) ↗

    printed pp. 180–181: review standard and Rovas principle · published appellate opinion · Checked 2026-10-07

  33. 33
    MPSC U-21471, O-013347, 2025-07-10 ↗

    p. 97: existing corridors; pp. 114–116: engagement and filing guidelines · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  34. 34
    MPSC U-21472, O-013348, 2025-07-10 ↗

    major transmission certificate · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  35. 35
    MPSC distribution system planning ↗

    agency overview · Checked 2026-10-07

  36. 36
    MPSC: Get Involved ↗

    participation guidance · Checked 2026-10-07

  37. 37
    MPSC telecommunications regulation ↗

    agency overview · Checked 2026-10-07

  38. 38
    MPSC gas safety ↗

    agency overview · Checked 2026-10-07

  39. 39
    FERC electric transmission overview ↗

    federal overview · Checked 2026-10-07

  40. 40
    MPSC U-21932, O-013818, 2026-08-27 ↗

    PA 233 settlement for 90 MW solar facility · issued order · Checked 2026-10-07

  41. 41
    Open MPSC U-22248: Consumers Energy Line 300 rerouted pipeline segment ↗

    case opened September 28, 2026; no order in API result on October 7, 2026 · filed application; merits unresolved · Checked 2026-10-07

  42. 42
    Michigan Legislature: Senate Bill 930 of 2026, text and history ↗

    official text and history checked October 7, 2026 · legislative proposal · Checked 2026-10-07

  43. 43
    Michigan Legislature: Senate Bill 931 of 2026, text and history ↗

    official text and history checked October 7, 2026 · legislative proposal · Checked 2026-10-07

  44. 44
    Michigan Legislature: Senate Bill 932 of 2026, text and history ↗

    official text and history checked October 7, 2026 · legislative proposal · Checked 2026-10-07

  45. 45
    Michigan Legislature: Senate Bill 933 of 2026, text and history ↗

    official text and history checked October 7, 2026 · legislative proposal · Checked 2026-10-07

Related public research

Power lines along Michigan highways →Oneida–Sabine Lake route analysis →Saline tax-abatement analysis →Search public records at Open MPSC ↗

Prepared by Bommarito Consulting from public statutes, orders, court publications, and related research. Open MPSC is an independent access layer and is not affiliated with the Commission or State of Michigan. Applicant claims, calculated illustrations, issued decisions, and proposed changes are identified separately. Project-specific legal questions depend on the governing records and deadlines.

Working on something like this? Talk to us →