There have been a few filings in this docket. In chronological order, starting at the beginning, oh, with the statute first and then filings (and note, the statute does say “may.”):
Interesting filings today in PUC Docket R-26-172 — how can anyone oppose rulemaking, and how can anyone think it’s reasonable to route transmission and site generation without rules? The Public Utilities Commission is tasked with regulating utilities, and how does one regulate without regulations?
Here’s what has come in today — the deadline is 4:30 but I’ll have to hit the road soon — if others come in I’ll post later. This first one is choice:
And here’s what I had to say, on my behalf, and also clients North Route Group and NO765MN (CN-25-117 and CN-25-121) and the Andersens (CN-25-109), after seeing some of the comments:
Take a good look at what the legislature did to the rules. And those that say “renumbered,” click on those and you’ll see they were moved and repealed as well!
CHAPTER 7850, SITE OR ROUTE PERMIT; POWER PLANT OR LINE
Did you know that thanks to the 2024 Energy Omnibus (Ominous) Bill, there are virtually NO rules for routing and siting of utility infrastructure? The good news is that the “Prime Farmland Exclusion” was preserved, but where’d everything else go???? Yeah, it’s really bad, so I filed this Petition for Rulemaking, on eDockets, via email, and as above, tomorrow, U.S. Mail:
Really, take a look for yourself and see how little is left after the 2024 legislative purge. Really, take a look for yourself and see how little is left after the 2024 legislative purge — all that remains of Minn. R. ch. 7850 is “Standards and Criteria” which says nothing, and Prohibited Routes and Prohibited Sites:
I’ve filed a few of these, and have been on 2, maybe 3, rulemaking advisory committees, the most important was R-12-1246, where we worked for almost a decade, and the PUC tossed it! That was SO frustrating and infuriating.
Adding to hearing about it, just yesterday, I was told, emphatically, several times, that “our” State Senator Steve Drazkowski is saying that the 2024 Energy Omnibus Bill took authority away from local governments. Nope, nope, nope, that didn’t happen!
DID YOU REALLY SAY THAT, STEVE?
IT’S NOT TRUE!!!!
If anyone tries to tell you that the 2024 Energy Omnibus (Ominous) Bill took away local control over energy projects, be sure to correct them — it’s a problem having false information flying around!
I was also told that Drazkowski had authored a bill to “return” jurisdiction to local governments, but I cannot find it, will continue looking.
So… once more with feeling… SINCE 1973 – PUC jurisdiction over energy project is NOT new:
December 10, 2024 was the Power Plant Siting Act Annual Hearing. It was before ALJ Christa Moseng, and there were very few commenters. I’m not seeing any minutes, and don’t know if they’ll ever be posted. There were only two of us commenting, myself, and Dan Wanbeke, who has a CapX 2020 line on his land. If the proposed MN Energy CON line is built, he could be surrounded by transmission.
Wanbeke gave a detailed description of his experience and takeaways, one of the most important was a comment of the PUC’s Bob Cupit (since retired):
There are winners, and there are losers.
A very interesting part of Wambeke’s testimony was regarding the stray voltage problem, all the water in their farm was energized, and the shower tested at 15 VOLTS! The local utility has been out many times, and when Capx 2020 was down for a brief time, no stray voltage, and when it was again energized, the stray voltage was back. He testified about induction current, that when there’s a distribution line running parallel to a massive transmission line, there can be induction current (this also happens with pipelines), and the distribution lines are indeed parallel with CapX transmission. This is NOT rocket science, and the CapX utilities better deal with this. If meeting minutes come out, I’ll post, though the thought occurs to me that this was a “hearing,” so it will probably be a top secret transcript. Will keep an eye out.
These next two tidbits were handouts at the hearing:
FYI, the DOT “Policy of Accommodation” that should be entered in every docket, because it sets out how utilities can interact when projects are proposed near roads — I’ve observed cases where the utility paid no attention to DOT comments and landowners nearby were screwed with little notice because utility had to quickly alter plans because DOT would not allow planned placement:
I’d made oral comments at the hearing (via web), but had to put it in writing to be more specific, because the changes are immense, and there needs to be a record. As I said in my Comment, not for the first time, “I’m disgusted, frustrated, incensed, and committed to showing up before the Public Utilities Commission until I drop dead someday in the large hearing room.” I had to file a corrected version, was bleary-eyed and found typos, missing words and punctuation, and FYI, the first one below has been corrected:
This one, from Kristen Eide-Tollefson for CURE, Communities United for Responsible Energy, is important because she’s seen the changes over the decades, THREE decades, of dealing with the Power Plant Siting Act. Now it no longer exists, hence Eulogy for the PPSA:
