The Office of Attorney General’s Residential Utility Division (OAG-RUD) has told the gas utilities in search of recovery for its EXTREME supply expenses during the natural gas price spike in February where to go… or more correctly, where NOT to go — that this should NOT come out of ratepayer pockets — that it’s the on the shareholders. YES! Love it when this happens.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission has an “investigation” into the massive gas price spike in February, and how the huge price spike and increased costs should be handled (Many other states’ Commissions have opened an investigation too). Thus far, it’s appeared that the Commission’s intent is to pass it on to the ratepayers and spread it out so it’s not so painful. But not so fast folks! It’s so heartwarming to read a pleading, particularly one filed by Office of Attorney General – Residential Utilities Division, where they say “NO!”

Read it HERE:

There are three ongoing dockets at the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission looking at the “gas crisis” from February.

Now pay attention, because this HUGE gas spike was only 2-3 days:

Some background Legalectric posts:

Texas — it’s a gas — natural gas… DOH! February 17th, 2021

It’s still a GAS! February 28th, 2021

The PUC is looking at a few questions, but what troubling is that the Commission seems to presume that the utilities will recoup from ratepayers! This presumption was evident in previous Commission meetings, and was disturbing, to put it mildly!

There are three dockets trudging along on the same path, and to look at all the filings go to eDockets and look up the dockets:

  • 21-135
  • 21-138
  • 21-235

In May, the Commission issued another Notice of Comment Period and noted these issues, followed by a laundry list of topics for comments:

The AG’s Office minced no words and told them “NO!” For example:

Once more with feeling — ENJOY!

OAG_20217-175863-02

I’m particularly interested in storage, because a client lives above Minnesota’s only gas storage dome, an at least 10 square mile just north of Waseca, with 7 billion c.f. of natural gas stored below. A gas intermediate (not peaking) plant was proposed there, first a very small one, then one 10 times that in MW, and thankfully neither was built.

Knowing about that storage (and too many Minnesotans do not), storage was the focus of my comment in this docket last February:

OAG-RUD did address the failure of the gas utilities to utilize storage:

Bottom line to the OAG-RUD?

Jewell Jinkins Intervenors (JJI) well represented at Public Service Commission meeting

Cardinal-Hickory Creek: PSC reopens power line proceedings in wake of secret communications

And…

Cardinal-Hickory Creek Transmission Line Project: Joint statement

The applicants got at least steps toward what they wanted:

Oh yeah, it was a very weird meeting at the Wisconsin Public Service Commission. The Cardinal-Hickory Creek transmission was #41 (and #42 for closed session) on the agenda, but #1-40 were treated as a “consent agenda” and they rammed those through in maybe 5 minutes, maybe less (I couldn’t get online with laptop, phone, and fortunately, tablet worked)… I was late to the party! Just a couple of seconds late though…

Here’s the windup with the Applicants’ request and the comments filed on Tuesday:

Cardinal-Hickory Creek Transmission in trouble!

There’s a recording of the meeting, but WordPress won’t allow it!

Right after the meeting, the Public Service Commission filed a notice:

In our Reply, Reply_Rescind-and-Rehearing_JJI, we noted that there was a PSC staff memorandum filed on June 29, 2021, a memo that was not made public, and lo and behold, it was filed, and reveals important information that for sure should have been in the docket prior to the PSC meeting yesterday:

Let’s see, Applicants filed Motion 6/28 in Circuit Court, and Commission joined in that Motion… and the following day, Applicants file request to rescind at the Commission… hmmmm… related? WELL, DOH! Important information for the public and intervenors not part of the court case to know? WELL, DOH!

As we say in transmission, “IT’S ALL CONNECTED!”

How is this action before and by the Commission anything but an attempt to pull the jurisdictional rug out from under the Court? No CPCN, no jurisdiction, it’s moot. Please, prove me wrong!

And consider the Circuit Court judge’s Order of May 25, 2021 (underlining added, not in original):

The likely “tainted body” wants to undo its tainted decision before the court has a chance to rule on it? Doesn’t pass the smell test.

Here it is! I love it when this happens:

Here’s my favorite part, the “Unindicted Co-conspirator #1” appears:

Followed by another mention:

Isn’t it about time Co-conspirator #1 is indicted?