Legalectric

Just got notice of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission‘s Power Plant Siting Act annual hearing:

This happens every year, and it’s important to spread the word around. One change that is very good is that the Commission is doing a good job of serving notice of the hearing — there are ~ 128 pages of recipients of this notice! GOOD! Love the interwebs, makes it so easy to let people know what’s happening.

The “Power Plant” aspect is very broad, this includes not just “power plants,” but transmission lines, wind projects, and solar too. This is the opportunity to tell the Public Utilities Commission, and the state generally, what works and what doesn’t work about the procedures for siting electric utility infrastructure, ideally based on your experience.

One positive aspect of COVID is that hearings are now held in “hybrid” format, both in person and online via Webex:

It is best if using Webex (http://mn.gov/puc/about-us/calendar/ and click on “November 9, 2022” to get to “webcast”) to have video on your computer and to use the phone for audio, whether listening or making comments — that’s the best way to avoid feedback (using headphones helps too). The webcast link usually goes live 10 minutes or so before the hearing starts.

What to comment about? If you’ve had experience with a Public Utilities Commission siting docket, if there were issues that made it difficult to participate, things needing clarification, rules and/or procedures that need changing, this is a way to bring it to the Commission’s attention. Over the 27 years that I’ve been dealing with utility siting issues, oh, the horror stories I can and do tell. The system needs work, and siting infrastructure is a constantly evolving process, sometimes very good changes are made, and sometimes, no matter how much we petition (formally and informally), challenge, cajole, demand, they just won’t take responsibility, won’t do their jobs, and won’t even promulgate necessary rules.

A main point of holding this hearing, as above, is hearing from “the public.”

In addition to the public participation issues exposed in this report (about which not much, not enough, has been done), a few things that I’ll be bringing up, orally or in writing:

• The Office of Legislative Auditor investigated the Public Utilities Commission‘s practices, and this report had recommendations, most of which have not been addressed:

OLA-Report_PUC Public Participation 2020

• The Public Utilities Commission has not, in the decades I’ve been participating in the PPSA Annual Hearing, EVER brought up the PPSA for discussion and ACTION on issues raised.

• Wind siting “guidelines” were adopted via Commerce-EERA without public notice or opportunity for input: Large Wind Application Guide.2

• Notice has not been provided to landowners on transmission line routes where “alternate” routes are proposed, and sometimes landowners have not discovered their land may be affected until the public hearing, very late in the process.

• Power Plant Siting Act rule revisions, due after the 2005 Power Plant Siting Act legislative changes, have not been promulgated, despite a years long process, NINE YEARS, many committee meetings, and a lot of work by a lot of people. The Public Utilities Commission just dropped it… no action… sigh… Minn. R. ch 7849 & 7850 Rulemaking? DEAD!

• Despite 2 rulemaking petitions to the Public Utilities Commission, there are no wind siting rules! The Commission refuses to promulgate wind siting rules, instead using Small Wind Standards:

There’s no end to the issues to raise.

In addition to the public hearing, comments may be submitted in writing:

Get to it! Register your experience with the Public Utilities Commission, and let them know what needs work.

Here’s a real DOH! which could have been avoided, but DOE through several administrations keep throwing good money after bad for carbon capture and storage pipedream:

The ill-fated Petra Nova CCS project: NRG Energy throws in the towel

NRG’s Petra Nova project $$$:

Short version? FAIL! From the article:

Following this FAIL, the understatement of the century, from the article:

Yet CCS is a big part of the latest federal energy efforts. It’s also a huge boondoggle for not just outfits like NRC, but for certain “non-profits” like Great Plains Institute:

And check out these salaries:

Great Plains Institute helped push coal gasification, for extreme amounts of money…

Great Plains Institute – is Joyce getting their $$ worth?

January 18th, 2007

… but that pales in comparison for the dollars for this recent round of “carbon capture” promotional funding. Unreal…

Once more with feeling — carbon capture is not real, is not workable, is a waste of $$ and effort.

Today, Comments were due (1:30 p.m., whew, just under the wire):

This is regarding the Wisconsin Public Service Commission’s Application Filing Requirements. To look at the docket, go HERE – DOCKET SEARCH and search for 5-AFR-100.

It looks like other than DATCP (DATCP Comments) and ATC (American Transmission Company Comments on Proposed Application Filing Requirements for Transmission Line Projects), I’m the only one filing comments.

HOW CAN THIS BE?

Oh, but wait, look at this on the notice:

Here’s the full notice:

The National Park Service and the Federal Aviation Administratio, have announced an open period for Comments on its “air tour management plan.” And here is the scoping document with “potential alternatives for public comment,” rather short and sweet as these things go:

AIR TOUR MANAGEMENT PLAN

The “No Action Alternative” would be to continue air tours as have been happening, to recap:

Here’s the park, not that the tours are staying in the “North Unit” and not venturing into the “South Unit” operated jointly by the National Park Service and Oglala Sioux Tribe:

Check out the alternatives — what do you think?

Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. on October 6, 2022, and there’s no email option. Comments may be sent online using the park’s system at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/BadlandsATMP

… or use the form at the end of the plan, and send in writing to:

I have a soft spot for the Badlands, having been there in my “formative years,” and a few times since. When thinking of the Badlands, what floods into my brain is what a struggle it was for us, moi at 8 years old, to set up our BIGLY HUGE family tent trailer, “Sunny,” in a torrential rain, in the dark, with mud up to our ankles.

It was such a mess, wind soaking the tent, and blowing it around as we tried to set up. I remember my father trying to pound stakes into the mud, the wind blowing and we were all soaked… maybe that’s part of why my lil’ bro’ hates camping, and yet it fascinates me?!?!?! The Badlands can be so hellishly hot, but for sure that was NOT our August 1964 experience!!

From the photos and google earth, I’m guessing we were at the Sage Creek campground.

On the way to the Badlands, circa 2007, lots of white butts…

And 2016, even closer:

Lots of these cute little guys:

And of course nearby in Custer State Park, VERY nearby, close enough to be wary:

And don’t forget the Minuteman Missile National Historical Site, Interestate 90 at the 131 exit, where you can push the nuclear button:

Required reading for early September — there’s not much time until November 8th, and we have so much to do!