PUC pulls plug on Goodhue Wind project!

PUC Webcast here

‘Bout time this project went down…  What a thorny long drawn-out heated and circular discussion, but after a long five years, the Public Utilities Commission said no to Peter Mastic’s New Era and its request for an extension of time to get the project in service and operational.  Did I mention this has been a long journey?  It took five long years of persistent work on so many fronts, dogged work on the part of so many people!  L-O-N-G!  I first met with Goodhue Wind Truth and started representing them in late 2008, early 2009.

Just from today I have 12 pages of notes, so here’s the nutshell version, from the two page Revised Decision Options:

Revised Decision Options 20136-88332-01

• After a protracted discussion, they first voted to DENY Todd Guererro’s Motion for another two weeks to prepare as he was just hired on.  Nope, says the Commission, we don’t buy it, New Era f/k/a/ f/k/a has had plenty of time.
• And after an even longer more protracted and circular discussion, the Commission voted UNANIMOUSLY decision options 2 I & J:

• Then came their vote on the Extension Request as a housekeeping matter:

• And then, at the bottom of page 2, adding “August 23, 2013” as the date certain for a response:

DONE!

GOOD RIDDANCE!

Todd Guererro, representing Peter Mastic f/k/a f/k/a, did a valiant job given what he had to work with, a client who didn’t bother to comply with PUC Orders, Information Requests, and laws — he deserves battle pay for  taking the hits hurled by the Commissioners, deserved, but he did the best job possible… well, except he apparently didn’t know that the Commission had made the determination that the project was a C-BED project many years ago, that it was not the Commissioner of Commerce.

I kept my trap shut, thinking “less is more.”

IT’S DONE!

IT’S REALLY DONE!

And an interesting sidebar, NSP had its crew there to monitor its interests (Verified Complaint for Declaratory Judgment, and what a delightful Complaint it is!), and I learned that my arch-nemesis Mike Krikava is a horn player, has a big band of reknown, Nova Contemporary Jazz Orchestra (not Les Brown, perhaps Minnesota’s Toshiko Akiyoshi??), and even played with Ed Berger.  Mike brought it up, wondering how I knew the “real outside” Ed, but folks, it’s a small, small world… who knew?!?

And that after he ruins his reputation with his “heart-shaped” dot in his signature as noted by at least two of my GWT client’s cohorts:

Kinda skews my view, though the blustery honking of Bari fits him well.  It’s sort of like Mark Dayton being a shep nut — I will have higher expectations — we shall see… but if Krikava were a trumpet player, well, that’d be another matter entirely.

In the Rochester Post Bulletin tonight:

PUC commissioner:  It’s time to pull the plug on New Era project

By Brett Boese —  POST BULLETIN

June 20, 2013

 

ST. PAUL — After nearly five years in the permitting process, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission might have finally pulled the plug on the controversial New Era wind project.

After lengthy discussion during Thursday’s PUC hearing — including a few testy exchanges between commissioners and New Era attorney Todd Guerrero — the PUC unanimously approved five motions that will make it difficult, if not impossible, for the project to move forward in its current form.

“I think this is definitely a David and Goliath story,” said rural Goodhue farmer Ann Buck, one of the project’s critics, who have spent six figures battling the project over health, environmental and aesthetic concerns. “But I don’t think it was one rock that got the giant. It was many over the last four, five years.”

“The project’s finished, and it has been for awhile,” said Marie McNamara, of Goodhue Wind Truth. “They didn’t extend the in-service date, and the rest is just housecleaning.”

Despite spending more than $15 million in an unprecedented permitting process, New Era’s CEO Peter Mastic may be back to square one.

“To me, it’s time to pull the plug,” PUC chairwoman Beverly Jones Heydinger said during the debate.

The approved motions include:

• New Era violated Minnesota’s transfer provision law when Peter Mastic purchased the project from Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens in 2012, which prohibits the transfer of power purchase agreements previously approved with Xcel Energy. It’s unclear how this ruling will affect Xcel’s recent lawsuit against New Era that seeks to end its PPA agreements and collect monetary damages.

• New Era’s request to extend the project’s Certificate of Need was denied because Mastic’s group failed to show it was prepared to move forward, which includes a failure to specify an in-service date.

• New Era has 14 days when the PUC’s written order is released to surrender its Site Permit or show cause that it intends to begin construction by Aug. 23. The applicant must also demonstrate it is able to commence construction by that date, which appears to be impossible.

In other rulings, the PUC requested “a more comprehensive response” to the investigation of public claims in the project area and a summary of the March 27 site visit. Steve Betcher, Goodhue County attorney, also urged the commission to re-examine the project’s status as a community-based energy development (C-BED), but the PUC chose to avoid that issue.

Guerrero was the lone New Era proponent to attend Thursday’s meeting. Mastic was busy out-of-state, he said, so it remains unclear what the future holds for the 78-megawatt project sited near Zumbrota.

“Obviously, it’s not good … but I don’t know what the client plans to do, to be honest with you,” Guerrero said afterward. “I guess Mr. Mastic will have to review his options and has some decisions to make.”

Thursday’s meeting got off to an unusual start. Due to Xcel’s lawsuit against New Era, Fredrikson & Byron was forced to withdraw as New Era’s counsel; it also represents Xcel.

Mastic replaced longtime legal counsel Christine Brusven on Monday with Guerrero, who almost immediately requested a two-week delay to familiarize himself with the extensive record. PUC staff responded by keeping the issue on the agenda, and commissioners denied the same request from Guerrero on Thursday morning after a drawn-out plea.

That led to a few heated responses — including one that suggests New Era might choose to challenge the PUC ruling in the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

“Given the history of this project, more information should have been provided and I cannot explain why it wasn’t,” Guerrero told the commission. “If I was in your shoes, I’d show the same level of consternation.