Tonight is the public hearing, using the “Alternative Review Process,” for the transmission for the Freeborn Wind Project, the very same project that has been recommended be denied by the Administrative Law Judge:

WE WON!!! ALJ Recommend Freeborn Permit be DENIED, or…

Be there or be square:

What’s at issue?  Most important is “need” and lack thereof.  Under Minesota Rules, need may not be addressed in the environmental review:

Questions of need, including size, type, and timing; alternative system configurations; and voltage must not be included in the scope of environmental review conducted under this chapter.  Minn. Stat. 216E.02, Subd. 2.

BUT, where there is no Certificate of Need, issues of size, type and timing MAY be addressed — the prohibition of addressing need only applies where a Certificate of Need has been issued:

7850.4200 FACTORS EXCLUDED.

When the Public Utilities Commission has issued a Certificate of Need for a large electric power generating plant or a high voltage transmission line or placed a high voltage transmission line on the certified HVTL list maintained by the commission, questions of need, including size, type, and timing, questions of alternative system configurations, and questions of voltage shall not be factors considered by the commission in deciding whether to issue a permit for a proposed facility.

There is no Certificate of Need required or issued for this project, and so “questions of need, including size, type, and timing, questions of alternative system configurations, and questions of voltage” are fair game.

In this case, it’s particularly relevant where the ALJ has recommended the project site permit be denied!  No project, no transmission needed.

Off to Albert Lea!

Photo of TNT, LLC truck cab taken at the scene

On Thursday, just as we were leaving the hearing for the Freeborn Wind project at the Albert Lea Armory, a large chunk of ice flew off one of the Bent Tree turbines and hit the drivers side of a truck going south on Hwy. 13 towards Albert Lea.  Put a scratch and lite dent in the door, and took a big chunk out of the faring near the gas cap.  That’s a big piece of plastic that costs way, way too much to replace.

A chunk of ice also hit the Langrud’s shop nearby.  Others???

The ice last week was unreal, I’ve never experienced that level of ice coating my vehicle as last Monday, it was raining all the way from Red Wing to Albert Lea, and in places it was an inch thick.  I can just imagine how it was caked on the turbines.

It’s been reported in both the Albert Lea Tribune and KAAL TV 6:

Complaint: Ice From Freeborn Co. Wind Turbine Hit Semi – KAAL

Turbines temporarily shut down after ice … – Albert Lea Tribune

And here is the letter sent by Alliant/Wisconsin Power & Light Company regarding the ice throw:

20182-140446-01_Letter Bent Tree

 

KAAL’s star witness!

It’s over, only two days, well, three, the public hearing was on Tuesday, lots and lots of people attended and spoke up.

This was before the public hearing started, and not long after it started they added two more sections o seating over on our side to my right.  It was a god crowd, articulate and well spoken.

The AP article about this project is all over the country.

New rebellion against wind energy stalls or stops projects:

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Santa Cruz Sentinal

Porterville Recorder

Billings Gazette (lots of photos!)

Washington Post

The Oklahoman

El Defensor Chieftain

Seattle Times

CNBC.com

Cache Valley Daily News

Enough, you get the idea…

Freeborn Wind Project is ramping up.

20182-139890-01_Rep. Walz Letter on behalf of “constituent Melville Nickerson, Director of Governmental Relations, Invenergy,” both of CHICAGO!

Photo taken by moi.  This is the bald eagle that flew up from the 120th St. ditch as I approached the Hansen home in the Freeborn Wind permit footprint.  There’s a nest just a bit to the west, just south of 120th.  Guess they don’t want me posting any more eagle photos on their fb page:

And in the news:

Albert Lea City Council Hears Economic Benefits Freeborn Wind Farm

Wind Farm Proposal in Freeborn County

Today, the Department of Natural Resources filed a Motion to Quash so its employees wouldn’t have to appear, filed February 9 regarding Subpoenas that were served December 11 and 18, 2017.  Roughly two months ago.  After a conversation with DNR Counsel Sherry Enzler where she didn’t want her people sitting around all day so we agreed to a 3 p.m. time, which would need to be locked in with the judge.  Now this.  Good grief.  But our conversation that day was so bizarre that I memorialized it with a letter to the judge, though not in technicolor.

Joyal_Motion_20182-139915-01

Joyal_Memo_20182-139915-02

Joyal_Aff_20182-139915-03

Mixon_Motion_20182-139916-01-2

Mixon_Memo_20182-139916-02

Mixon_Aff_20182-139916-03

OK, fine, whatever… here we go!

Well, Association of Freeborn County Landowners got Subpoenas, served them, and for some reason, the Dept. of Commerce and Dept. of Health really don’t want to bring their reports into the Freeborn Wind docket:

Subpoena_OAH_Cover&Subpoenas

Here are the reports that really matter:

Dept of Health – Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines

Dept of Health – Comment Pages 59-61 from Siting_InitialFiling_Appendix A_Agency Correspondence

Commerce – Bent Tree Noise Monitoring and Noise Report

Commerece – email_8-14-2017_Dokouzian-Miltich

One way or another, these reports WILL get in the record.  Why?  Well, look at the recommendations in the Dept. of Health comment:

Pretty specific? And the more general recommendations fro the “Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines” report:

The Dept. of Health report is part of Invenergy’s Roberts’ testimony, but it’s not entered in the record yet.  The Dept. of Health 5/2/2017 Comment was part of the Applicant’s Appendix A (pps. 59-61) and again, it’s not part of the record yet.  So just making sure it all gets in there one way or another.

Do tell — has the Applicant followed these recommendations of the Minnesota Department of Health in siting their project?  Has the Dept. of Commerce followed these recommendations in reviewing the project?  Has the Public Utilities Commission followed these recommendations in considering permitting the project?

And what about Commerce?  We have documentation that in the Bent Tree project, which had wind noise modeling performed as a part of the application and permitting process, noise modeling which said, “no problem,” and yet (click for larger version):

And the full Bent Tree Noise Monitoring and Noise Report ordered by the Public Utilities Commission.

Commerce filed a Motion to Quash:

17-410-Motion_to_Quash_Hearing_Subpoena

And we reached an agreement:

Commerce-AFCL_Agreement_20181-139130-01

Oh, but wait… they’re really not wanting that Bent Tree info to get in the record! So once more with feeling:

Motion To Exclude_Commerce_20181-139379-01

OK, whatever…

AFCL Response_Motion to Exclude_20181-139493-01

And then there’s the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), and they also jumped on the bandwagon, clearly the Asst. Commissioner who signed the Dept of Health – Comment wasn’t the author and didn’t know much about it (!), so:

Letter and Stipulation for the Release of the Assistant Commissioner

Which leaves the DNR. Got a call from DNR Counsel Sherry Enzler, who clearly didn’t get that Commerce Motion to Quash had no bearing on DNR Subpoena, and that wed reached an agreement and Commerce had withdrawn their Motion, oh my… but anyway, we agreed that we’d set a time certain the last day of the hearing for the DNR staff.  No problem… though we’ll need an Order from the judge confirming that.

DNR_Time Certain

So on we go…

Oh, but wait, the Applicants, Invenergy, also got their $0.02 in, and filed a Motion:

20181-139400-02_Freeborn_Motion to Strike Hansen Testimony

… OK, again, whatever, gotta get response in on this one…

And may the ALJ decide!!!

The Administrative Law Judge in this case, and the Public Utilities Commission, the ultimate decider, need to recognize that the permitting system is fatally flawed.  Prevention, precaution, prudence…