AWA Goodhue appeal refiled
December 13th, 2011
The T. Boone Pickens’ AWA Goodhue Wind Project proposed for Goodhue County is headed to the Appellate Court… again.
Here we go!!!
Why again??? Ask the PUC — they sent around a bogus memorandum pushing to appeal in September, we did, and said, “Hey, Appellate Court, look what they’re saying, can you believe it?” and the Appellate Court said, “PUC, what ever do you think you’re doing? APA rules do not pre-empt your own rules about appeal, DUH!”
They’re worth a read to see how convoluted and brazen the PUC’s push was. The Court agreed with us and said the PUC was so egregious that hey, don’t worry about it, when you refile at the appropriate time, NO CHARGE!!! As it should be.
Gov. Dayton rolls and caves again!
November 17th, 2011
O… M… D!
Gov. Mark Dayton has done it again, apparently looking to leave a legacy of being one of the most environmentally harmful Governors in Minnesota history.
And to think he’s a shep guy…
What’s this all about? Well, for example, first there was his roll and cave on MPCA and DNR permitting, “streamlining” or gutting, as the case may be, beating the Republicans and their legislative agenda to the punch:
Dayton “streamlines” for corporate interests!
And then adding insult to injury:
Walton’s Bill Grant – Deputy Commissioner of Energy?
Now, by Executive Order, he does it again, this time to the EQB:
Executive Order 11-32
Check it out:
By November 15, 2012, the EQB shall evaluate and make recommendations on how to improve environmental review, given the changes made in Chapter 4, House File 1, and the recommendations contained in the Office of the Legislative Auditor Environmental Review and Permitting Report.
Here’s Chapter 4, House File 1.
And now for the Office of the Legislative Auditor Environmental Review and Permitting Report:
Legislative Auditor’s Report – Environmental Review & Permitting
Thursday – PUC takes up AWA Goodhue Reconsideration
November 3rd, 2011
This Thursday, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission takes up our many Motions for Reconsideration.
PUC Notice of November 10, 2011 Meeting
Thursday, November 10, 2011
(not to be heard before 10:00 a.m.)
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
3rd Floor Large Hearing Room
121 – 7th Place East
St. Paul, Minnesota
Here are the ones that I filed for Goodhue Wind Truth:
Just out are the:
MN Court of Appeals questions PUC’s missive!
October 3rd, 2011
Today the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued an Order that was just what I’d been looking for, questioning the Public Utilities Commission’s actions in pushing filing of appeals by intervenors in the AWA Goodhue Wind Project docket. Here’s the Order:
It seems that our inclusion of the PUC’s letter of September 13, 2011 got their attention, it seems that our explaining that this was why we were filing appeals at this early date (dare I say premature?!?!) got their attention, because the PUC pushed those appeals with this letter, the likes of which I’ve never seen before — READ THIS:
In essence, they threatened us, saying that we’ve got to appeal by September 22, 2011, or we lose our chance to appeal. So we had best appeal, because if we didn’t and waited until the customary time, within 30 days of their FINAL decision regarding our Reconsideration filings, if we’d waited, we’d be fighting their Motions to toss us out for an “untimely” appeal, missing the date, and we’d be arguing uphill. And that’s what I love about our spot right now, because we’re in, and the court is looking at it, saying, “HUH? Whatever were they thinking?”
The PUC has the uphill battle now. I love it when that happens…
Here we go. By October 11, we get to write a Memorandum with our responses to four questions, just the right four questions that I want them to address:
(a) Is the MPUC required to publish a notice in the State Register of a decision granting a permit to construct an LWECS?
(b) If the answer to (a) is yes, should the time to file a motion for reconsideration within ten days after the decision or order under Minn. Stat. § 14.64 be construed as ten days after notice of the decision is published in the State Register?
(c) Was a timely request for reconsideration filed regarding the MPUC’s decision dated August 23, 2011?
(d) If the answer to (c) is yes, should these consolidated appeals be dismissed as premature, to return jurisdiction to the MPUC to rule on the request for reconsideration?
FYI, I’ve checked the State Register and the PUC has not published notice regarding their AWA Goodhue decision.
ARE WE HAVING FUN YET?!?!?!?! Could this order get any better???
AWA Goodhue Motions for Reconsideration
September 13th, 2011
Yesterday, we filed Motions for Reconsideration of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Order regarding the AWA Goodhue (a/k/a T. Boone Pickens) Wind Project:
What’s really weird about it is that not only is there a PUC Order where the ALJ’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommendation is adopted, with a few amendments and deletions, but there’s an “EFP” Order too, with the Energy Facilities Permitting writing their own separate overlapping “Findings.” Ummmmm…. who the hell is EFP to be writing Findings? When do intervenors get a chance to comment on them??? This is a very bizarre morphing that is not addressed anywhere in the rules. I can see EFP briefing papers, but Findings… and Findings that aren’t even cited? WTF?
Anyway, here’s what’s been filed, starting with my client, Goodhue Wind Truth:
GWT – Reconsideration – Site Permit
There are a lot of others, will post later, this is painfully slow…