Legalectric

My rulemaking petition has been given a docket number and now a Comment Period has been announced — Initial Comments due April 30, and Reply Comments due May 7!

What does the Commission deem “Topic for Comment?” and background?

Note the “background,” for some reason it doesn’t mention that nearly all the rules were REPEALED!!

Why does this matter? Who cares? I would hope the Public Utilities Commission cares (though I won’t hold my breath). The legislature had something to say about rulemaking when they repealed almost all the rules:

Note the use of “may,” which is way too much wiggle room: “The commission, in order to give effect to the purposes of this chapter, may adopt rules consistent with this chapter…” Knowing how they avoided rulemaking and tossed the years of work in docket R-12-1246, “may” is just not adequate. I can’t find that any rulemaking has begun, and I’d nosed around about it and no return call… no surprise. It seems to be a “Rules? We don’t need no stinkin’ rules!” attitude. Think that’s wise when we’re looking at Need and Routing for the biggest transmission lines in Minnesota history? As Shawn would say, “Goes to show you don’t think!!!!!”

OK, fine… if you, the regulators, won’t get on it, no problem. Here’s a rulemaking petition:

Rulemaking Petition – Minn. R. ch. 7850 & 7849 April 13th, 2026

Now, let’s file comments, and get you all on record about it, and better yet, let’s get moving on rules. I mean really, look at what all was repealed — there are virtually NO RULES for siting and routing of utility infrastructure!

CHAPTER 7850, SITE OR ROUTE PERMIT; POWER PLANT OR LINE

PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

What rules were there before? Check it out — which of these would have no use or purpose in routing and siting utility infrastructure? Which of these are crucial, necessary for reasonable process, necessary to consider important factors and factoids? Rules are how the Commission enacts the statutes!

So get to work on those comments! Send to: