What’s up with Xcel’s new rate increase?
December 13th, 2015
What’s going on? Well, it’s more complicated than just a regular ol’ rate case, which is complicated enough. There are two directly relevant dockets, the “Rate Design” docket 15-662, and the “Rate Cast” docket 15-826. Check the video links below, it’s worth watching while waiting for the rice to boil…
Right after their previous rate case was significantly reduced by the Minnesota Public Service Commission, and right after their “e21 lite” agenda was rammed through the legislature, Xcel Energy has filed a request for a massive transmission driven rate increase.
As a material term of the merger, Xcel agreed that there would be no rate cases filed, no rate increases, for 5 years (in addition to this agreement: Merger Stipulation Dec 15 1999). Since that time, there’s been almost annual rate cases filed, and here’s how those turned out, in strictly financial terms:
Xcel’s problem with how the electric market is working?
So what did they do? First, they got all the “usual suspects” together to push for reworking of the rates, their “e21” agenda:
Just filed Petition for Intervention in Xcel’s e21 Docket
e21 Planning Meeting announced
e21 met resistance, and in the 2015 legislative session, they did pass some of it:
On top of that, Xcel pushed at the legislature and established another rate class for the biggest of the big customers with newly lowered rates, lower than the already lower big customer rates:
And yet they encourage these large consumers in classes with MUCH lower rates, to consume, consume, consume, at our expense!?!??!!
Back to the rate case. Here’s what the AG’s Office has to say (and remember, the AG’s RUD is there to represent the residential and small business ratepayers):
Yes, “woefully inaccurate. That’s how it went in the CapX 2020 Certificate of Need, predicated on a 2.49% annual increase “forcasted” by Xcel, yet accepted by the Administrative Law Judge, well, at a slightly lower but still “woefully inaccurate” projection, and now that ALJ is the chair of the Public Utilities Commission. Will their forecasts be given sufficient skeptical scrutiny?
And another filing, as Xcel in its reply comment tried to sneak in an unsupported definition of “Test Year” that should not fly:
Here’s the PUC Staff Briefing Papers for last Thursday’s meeting:
Staff Briefing Papers_1_201512-116122-01
Staff Briefing PapersAddeudum_1_201512-116402-01
Staff Briefing Papers Addendum_2_ PI Decision Options_201512-116402-02
Here’s the webcast: Video
Docket 15-662 — Rate Design — video at 00:15:00 – 02:20:00
Docket 15-826 — Rate Case — starts at 02:20:00
… and note the agenda:
In 15-662, Rate Design, Xcel’s e21 Initiative was present and visible there:
The discussion (see Video) regarding the stakeholders’ meetings and comments had too much of an emphasis on reaching consensus, too much because this limited number and perspective of parties in the discussion is not representative of the public and any consensus reached would not likely be in the public interest.
Now, on to the rate case part of the Commission meeting Video (starting at 02:20:00).
Note there wasn’t much in the way of initial Comments reflected in the Staff Briefing Papers!
Commissioner Tuma is taking language directly from e21 and related testimony and incorporating into the Commission’s motion!!!
Arkansas natural gas pipeline fails
June 7th, 2015
A Spectra Energy owned backup line to the Texas Eastern natural gas pipeline ruptured, last Sunday or Monday. It’s a 24″ pipeline, and 4 million cubic feet of gas leaked out. That’s a lot of gas, one article says it’s enough for 60+ homes for a year!
What’s most odd about this is the lackadaisical attitude about reporting this problem, see that last article on the list below. One article reported:
Arkansas River pipeline blowout occurred Sunday morning, cause still unknown
Then within a couple minutes, the turbulence dissipated and disappeared. Metzler said he drove down to the river that afternoon, but to his puzzlement could find nothing amiss. He and others talked about contacting the Coast Guard, he said, but decided against it because “we didn’t know what to tell them. Something had happened, but nobody knew what.”
…
Metzler said there was concrete scattered across the deck of the Chris M, skid marks across the boat’s surface, and handrails and an exhaust stack knocked over. “The concrete still had the form of a pipe,” he said, and parts of it were “covered in soot — I decided this thing must have been on fire.” He is convinced the Texas Eastern exploded. “I believe a big piece of pipe blew out of the river and flew through the air,” he said.
The towboat Chris M, owned by Jeffrey Sand Co. in North Little Rock, was damaged Sunday morning when a natural gas pipeline i… (Credit: Special to the Democrat-Gazette)Pipeline in Arkansas River Ruptures, Releases Natural Gas
Natural Gas Released as Pipeline Ruptures in Arkansas River
Arkansas pipeline shut after rupture
63-year-old gas line that blew had a ‘smart pig’ check in ’12
Officials close Arkansas River after natural gas line ruptures
Gas Pipeline Ruptures in Arkansas River
Natural gas line ruptures in river near LR airport
CHECK THIS ONE: News of pipeline rupture called slow
SF 1735 – SHAME on each Senator who voted for it
May 5th, 2015
UPDATE: It’s over… the Senate Rules committee let it go to the floor…
So this morning, SF 1735 was up before the Senate Rules committee. It was “late” and so Sen. John Marty brought it to Rules with a Motion to suspend the rules and let it go to the floor, late as it was. And that passed, and so now it is going on to the Senate floor.
Unbelievable… SHAME on Sen. John Marty and the Senate Energy Committee for ramming this through despite all those testifying against it. SHAME on the Rules committee for letting this bill go through. SHAME on all those funded “environmental” groups who sat through watching this happen, sat there silently. SHAME on Bill Grant, now Deputy Commissioner of Commerce, f/k/a Ass. Director of Izaak Walton League, for shepherding this through.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Again, this may be the last meaningful opportunity to influence S.F. 1735. Suggestions:
Senate Rules and Administration Committee emails: sen.michelle.fischbach@senate.mn, sen.warren.limmer@senate.mn, sen.scott.newman@senate.mn, sen.paul.gazelka@senate.mn, sen.jim.metzen@senate.mn, sen.rod.skoe@senate.mn (Committee page for links to those who use “contact” forms, CLICK HERE). Chair, Tom Bakk, 651-296-8881
Call/Email Sen. John Marty asking him to WITHDRAW S.F 1735, the Xcel deregulation bill, but act to defend the Community Solar Garden law: (651) 296-5645, jmarty@senate.mn
**********************
Rep. Garofalo — working against landowner interests
April 23rd, 2015
The price of Garofalo is too cheap — toadying to the corporate masters.
Rep. Garofalo claimed it is not the legislature’s role to interfere in private contracts. But in taking out the language specific to Black Oak/Getty wind, he adds this tidbit, it supposedly was added in committee “during markup” — did anyone on the committee understand? Did anyone look at this footnote to Minn. Stat. 500.30? It’s in the 2nd Engrossment, then 3rd, and 4th which was passed yesterday with some amendments:
This is language that modifies a footnote to Minn. Stat. 500.30. It pushes up the sunset of the 7 year limit for wind easement contracts. And there’s nothing in here that says that it does not apply to current contracts. Geronimo wants it because it WOULD apply, at least they’d try to make that happen!
Nope, this is not OK at all. That’s just doing the corporation’s bidding in another way. Thanks, thanks a lot. If you want to keep this language in, it needs to expressly state that it has no application to existing contracts.
I wonder — did Sempra know they were jumping into this morass when they bought the project?
Now it’s time to keep on Senate to remove it, and be alert for the Conference Committee.
Here’s the contact info for all Senators, it will hit the floor sometime, either in SF 1431 or maybe even SF 2101:
Why?
1) We need to make sure that the Senate, THE WHOLE SENATE, knows that the special legislation for Geronimo in S.F. 1431, p. 34, lines 8-16, must be deleted when this comes to the floor in the Senate, if not before. Check that bill carefully.
2) Also don’t try to sneak it in like they did in the House:
3) They also need to know that this special legislation for Geronimo must not appear in any other bill — don’t try to sneak it in somewhere else, and don’t forget to take it out, don’t try to drop it in during Conference Committee! NO! NO! NO!
Contact each and every Senator and let them know “No special legislation for Geronimo” and that under Minn. Stat. 500.30, wind easement contracts now terminate after 7 years — do not attempt to change this 7 year limit for existing contracts between landowners and the wind developer/owner. This change would be for the benefit of the Black Oak/Getty wind project(s) and to the detriment of the landowners.
Energy Omnibus Bills this session?
April 22nd, 2015
What’s going on with these Energy Omnibus Bills? It’s bad enough that they do it in this “Omnibus” form, instead it’s OMINOUS, because they toss such a mash of incongruous things together, a little for everyone so they have a “deal, a package deal, and it’s a good deal” when it’s really just a mess that adds up to bad policy.
Senate Energy Omnibus bill is SF 1431:
The Companion HF 1678 Textisn’t going anywhere…
House Employment and Economic Development Bill is filled with energy related backpedaling and is even more OMINOUS:
The “Senate Companion” to HF 843 does not really exist, but the stated companion, SF 804 was added to S.F. 2101, the Omnibus agriculture, environment, natural resources, jobs, and economic development appropriations:
With the different bills, it gets difficult when considering the special legislation for Black Oak/Getty that Geronimo added to the Senate bill (SF 1431). That language remains in SF 1431. Now it’s BACK in HF 843 — as of tonight.
Initially, it was added to the House bill (HF843) without any committee discussion, but was then removed (YES!) after loud objections.
Better yet, the new owner of the project, Sempra U.S. Gas & Power, wants nothing to do with Geronimo’s legislative “fix.” From “Signed, sealed and sold: Controversial legislative fix gone with the wind” Watchdog.org Minnesota Bureau, by Tom Steward, Sempra confirms that important distinction between itself and the former owner, Geronimo (also linked below):
Good! Sempra, thank you for taking a step back! That they’re distancing from legislative action on private contracts is a sign that they have a sense of ethics and won’t try to steamroll this project through. They deserve a hearty “Here! Here!” Will Sempra give a listen to landowners? We shall see!
But then tonight, I heard that Rep. Garofalo put it back in. Specific wording remains to be seen, let’s have a look at the 4th Engrossment, which should be out soon. But noooo, this sly change was added a while ago:
Rep. Garofalo, you’d said on the record that it wasn’t the legislature’s business to interfere in private contracts. Now it’s suddenly OK. So which is it? Now you think it’s OK to jump to your corporate masters and put that language in, to the detriment of the residents of Raymond and Getty Township who have contracts, contracts with specific stated termination dates? Shame… what changed?
And Sempra supposedly isn’t the only one to publicly back off — two sources in the Senate have said, IN WRITING, that Geronimo has said it wants that language deleted from the Senate version. SO LET’S DO IT!
In the meantime, though, despite those assurances, we need to keep at it. We need to continue to let the Senate know to remove Section 40 of S.F. 1431, which is lines 34.8 – 34.16 on p. 3,4 to eliminate that special legislation for Geronimo:
It’s supposed to happen when it hits the floor for a vote, and right now, “negotiations” seem to be stalled out, everything is behind closed door, and we have no way of knowing what’s really going on.
So what to do?
1) We need to thank everyone for removing the offensive special legislation from HF 843. We need to make sure they know that the special legislation language must not appear in any House version. And don’t even think of putting this special legislation interfering with private contracts into any bill in Conference Committee.
Contact each and every House member and let them know “No special legislation for Geronimo” and that under Minn. Stat. 500.30, wind easement contracts now terminate after 7 years — do not attempt to change this for existing contracts between landowners and the wind developer/owner of the Black Oak/Getty wind project(s). Stand up for the people of Raymond and Getty Townships and remove this language. Say NO to your corporate masters!
2) We need to make sure that the Senate, THE WHOLE SENATE, knows that the special legislation for Geronimo in S.F. 1431, p. 34, lines 8-16, must be deleted when this comes to the floor in the Senate. They also need to know that this special legislation for Geronimo must not appear in any other bill — don’t try to sneak it in somewhere else, and don’t forget to take it out, don’t try to drop it in during Conference Committee! NO! NO! NO!
Contact each and every Senator and let them know “No special legislation for Geronimo” and that under Minn. Stat. 500.30, wind easement contracts now terminate after 7 years — do not attempt to change this for existing contracts between landowners and the wind developer/owner of the Black Oak/Getty wind project(s).