Microsoft is objecting to an agreement between We Energies and the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, saying it was not involved in negotiations and the agreement does not go far enough to ensure consumers do not pay for costs related to bringing power to the company’s $20.6 billion in data center projects in the state.

Microsoft said that it was not allowed to give input on the agreement and the agreements “predictably contain significant deficiencies – errors, contradictions and inconsistencies – and raise several significant cost-of-service and open access issues that support a Commission finding that the Agreements may not be just and reasonable.”

The objections were raised in a filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission with Microsoft stating that a settlement judge would be the best way to resolve the issues.

Microsoft said that the agreement won't allow the company to fully fulfill its promises in the federal Ratepayer Protection Pledge but it also objected to it leaving the timeline of transmission upgrades in the hands of the power companies.

Microsoft and Oracle are managing data centers in Port Washington and Racine County that are estimated to lead to $4 billion in new natural gas projects and $2 billion in new big power lines in both Wisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.

“Microsoft respectfully requests that the Commission initiate hearing and settlement judge procedures so that Microsoft may continue efforts to work with ATC and WEPCo, as well as the Wisconsin Commission, the Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin, and others, to resolve the deficiencies,” Microsoft wrote.

Microsoft said that having an accurate agreement is essential so that power is connected in a timely manner and the infrastructure is in place for Microsoft’s Racine County projects.

The company announced in June that the first phase of its Fairview data center projects was complete.

Microsoft wrote that American Transmission Company and We Energies have no incentive to meet the in-service dates for power transmission and the companies are capable of “updating the schedule, and thus the payments, if their timelines slip” as part of the agreement.