Legalectric

Are you concerned about data centers? Time to speak up and DO SOMETHING!

Two data centers are in the works, both Google, and Xcel and MP have filed Electric Service Agreements (EAS) with the PUC.

TODAY comments are due on whether the Dept. of Commerce should get $250,000 for consultant “for identifying, tracking, and appropriately assigning the costs and revenues associated with integrating these large loads.” They’d sure better get that because these are the first and we need to do the best we can in assuring ratepayers aren’t stuck (that’s the PUC’s part), and then there’s water issues probably via the DNR. Here’s the notice:

That’s a no-brainer — we need to dig into this and it’s a bunch of new issues and beyond the expertise in Commerce, and the experts are going to cost.

And substantive notice also just came out, this one is crucial, and so far only in 25-159, the Minnesota Power/Hermantown docket:

It took five days after the filing and then “Notice of Objection Period” for this “Notice of Comment Period” to come out on the Hermantown one, so I’d expect a “Notice of Comment Period” any day now for Pine Island.

Here are the two agreements. It’d be good to compare and see if there are any differences. And yeah, gotta read these things to have anything to comment on!

MP & Harmony/Google Agreement – Hermantown

April 9th, 2026

Xcel’s Pine Island ESA for Data Center

April 17th, 2026

Get to work and start grinding out comments — we’ve got until July 21, 2026 for Initial Comments on Hermantown ESA so that’s enough time to wade through the ESAs and figure out what’s what, even with the redactions.

And I’ll post the Pine Island “Notice of Comment Period” when it arrives.

Check this take on the PowerOn Midwest project:

PowerOn Midwest Project Series Looking to Enhance Electric Grid to Meet Changing Needs

Too bad they weren’t at the meeting last night! Well attended meeting this evening in Windom on the “PowerOn Midwest” transmission project, PUC Docket CN-5-117.

Tomorrow, two more:

The purpose was to “inform” and to take comments on scoping of “Environmental Report.” The notice:

Here’s the order holding that the Application is complete and referring for a Contested Case!!

Here’s the main part of the order that I’m wondering about — exactly how will this work:

There are even more meetings next week:

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

At the April 13, 2026 Red Wing City Council meeting, Mayor Iocco said that he’d been to North Dakota to talk with them about what it means to host a nuclear plant.

Iocco gave a short report on his activities since the last meeting, part of which was a trip to North Dakota to speak with their nuclear committee, that they’re wanting to build a nuclear plant, and he was there to tell them about hosting a nuclear plant. ???

Here’s the link, this starts at ~1:39:

https://redwingmn.portal.civicclerk.com/event/3944/media

Look who else is a part of this — are we surprised?

The North Dakota legislature has an “Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee” and here are links.

FYI, TODAY and TOMORROW, they’re in Idaho, INL.

• AGENDA
• VIDEO – 4/21 – it’s live… (check section on E.O.s and “regulatory reform”)
• VIDEO – 4/22 – should be posted tomorrow

Here are meetings with links. Iocco said that this March 24th meeting was the 3rd he’d been to, LISTEN TO WHAT MAYOR IOCCO SAYS, BEGINNING AT 11:04. But first, here’s the meeting minutes version of what he said:

March 24, 2026 – 10:00 am to 4:00 pm CDT

• Agenda
• Meeting Video – Iocco starts at 11:04
• Minutes

December 15, 2025 – 10:00 am to 4:00 pm CST

• Agenda
• Meeting Video
• Minutes

September 3, 2025 – 9:00 am to 5:00 pm CDT

• Agenda
• Meeting Video
• Minutes

Committee Memorandums

• Advanced Nuclear Energy Study – Background Memorandum (PDF)
• Request for Proposal and Proposal Responses – Advanced Nuclear Energy Study (PDF)
• Supplementary Rules of Operation and Procedure of the North Dakota Legislative Management

Is this promotion in the name of the City of Red Wing authorized? Was there a message approved to be delivered?

I sure had questions when I heard this, and so I filed a Data Practices Act Request yesterday:

Two electric service agreements (ESA) have landed at the Public Utilities Commission, where the utilities are asking that the Commission approve the agreements, and today, a “Notice of Objection Period” has been announced.

A few days ago, another Notice – this time a substantive comment period. These two ESAs are running somewhat together — mark your calendars.

One of them is Minnesota Power, for its Hermantown data center, a Google (Harmony Group, Alphabet), PUC Docket M-26-159.

The other is from Xcel, for the Pine Island Google (Echo Zone) data center in Pine Island, PUC Docket M-26-170.

Commerce wants authorization to dig deep, hiring experts “to analyze the allocation of costs related to connecting data centers to the electrical grid. The Notice is telling the world that if they object, speak NOW!

Seems a good idea, given this is just getting started and we need to do it “right,” whatever that may be.

Let’s get to the guts of the matter. Here are the Petitions, followed by the notice of comment period — first, Minnesota Power, for Hermantown, M-26-159:

And next, Xcel – M-26-170 – and only the Objection notice so far, no Notice of Comment Period… YET!:

A few days ago, Xcel filed an Electric Service Agreement for Google’s Echo Zone data center in Pine Island. there are TWO dockets, but the document filed in M-26-170 and labeled same is also filed in M-26-171, also with M-26-170 on the first page, so… I’ve not gone page by page to compare.

Here’s the Electric Service Agreement from the M-26-170 — I’ll post both just because:

And here’s the one from M-26-171 that is labeled M-26-170, put here until I have time to compare: