Legalectric

The Minnesota Department of Commerce issued the Draft EIS for the Dodge County wind project, and about the “C” and “D” route proposals for a 345kV line through the heart of Dodge Center, they had this to say:

Here’s the full DEIS Narrative:

This is an example of why it’s crucial to get involved early, that comments must be made at the outset before they have moved into evaluating a proposed route, so that they can consider the input of people on the ground in the initial evaluation. Here, at least 14 people weighed in on the impacts of the C and D routes on their homes and their lives, and that message was heard.

Now’s the time for the City of Dodge Center to acknowledge that it was Tom Applegate’s efforts, alerting the City of Dodge Center and the residents effected by this project’s Route C and D possibility, helping generate the many comments that were filed, that made Commerce’s rejection of these routes a reality.

And I sure hope Commissioner Tuma acknowledges what a bad idea routes C and D were and that next time he has a routing idea, that he commits to spend at least an hour on google earth along the route to know what he’s proposing. These two proposed routes were the worst I’ve seen for a 345kV line.

Invenergy has sold Freeborn Wind, LLC, to Xcel Energy, well, Northern States Power Company – Minnesota. Sooooo, now they’ve asked the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission to approve the acquisition.

On or about June 14, the day of closing, Invenergy, the developer/old owner, TERMINATED 34 leases and good neighbor agreements covering over 4,470 acres of land.

What does that mean? Well, the project, and project approval, was based on 17,435 acres of leased land, and 4,470 is over 25% of the leased land. In the contested case, it was questionable whether the project had enough land, and there’s even a notation that Invenergy was working on acquiring more land, and we were told over and over again that there wasn’t enough room to make any adjustments, to move any turbines even a little bit! So now, at 75%, can they even build this?

Meanwhile, Xcel/NSPM has said they’ll be requesting a permit amendment, because they’ll be changing 32 Vesta V116 to Vesta V120, larger turbines, longer blades (needing larger 3 and 5RD setbacks) and longer blades equals more noise. They’ve said they’ll file new noise study, shadow flicker, and site plan.

In short, the project permitted December 19, 2018 and May 10, 2019, is not the same project.

Now this is NOT the same project… there are substantive, material changes… PUC doesn’t seem to care, Commerce doesn’t seem to care…

Association of Freeborn County Landowners is trying to wake up the Commission:

Xcel/NSPM has asked for approval of the acquisition, and the Commission announced a comment period, so here we go:

And read EERA’s Comment — good grief, blinders on the wrong end of the horse:

PUC will take a look at this sometime soon, but likely the NSPM amendment request will come in, IF they file it as planned, before that, as they expected to file in July. We shall see.

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…

At long last, the final round of Comments on the 5+ year long rulemaking have been filed.  A five year long process to enact the changes consistent with legislation passed in 2005, 12 years ago.  WHAT!?!?!  Yes, that’s how long it’s taken.  These are rules based on the Minnesota statutes for Certificate of Need (Minn. Stat. 216B.243) and the “Power Plant Siting Act” (Minn. Stat. Ch. 216E), which is transmission routing and power plant siting.

Here are the Reply Comments, and note there are very few:

Public Intervenors – No CapX 2020, U-CAN, North Route Group & Goodhue Wind Truth – FINAL_May 31 2017

McNamasra GWT Reply_20175-132415-01

Commerce EERA Reply_20175-132345-01

ITC Midwest_Reply_20175-132421-02

OtterTail Power_Reply_20175-132275-01

Xcel Energy_Reply_20175-132417-01

Next step — on the agenda at a future Public Utilities Commission meeting, where they’ll discuss changes, hopefully we’ll have oral argument of the parties and comments from the public, and then the rules are formally released to the public for public comment, a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, and then back to the Commission for approval.  Probably it will be August… given the public comment period and hearing, this will be at least a SIX YEAR PROCESS!

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission rulemaking for Minn. R. Ch. 7849, Certificate of Need, and 7850, Routing and Siting, is slowly moving forward. Here are the final drafts up for review before they go to the Commission for a rubber stamp and release for general comment:

20173-129606-02_Draft 7849

20173-129606-03_Draft 7850

Final initial comments on drafts were due on Monday and here they are, in alphabetical order:

20175-131641-01_Commerce DER

20175-131640-01_Commerce EERA

20175-131687-01_Goodhue Wind Truth – Marie McNamara

20175-131650-01-1_Great River Energy

20175-131683_ITC Comments and Attachments

20175-131698-01_Just Change

20175-131686-01_NoCapX – U-CAN – NRG & GWT

20175-131675-01_Wisconsin Power & Light

20175-131688-01_Xcel Energy

Reply comments are due by 4:30 p.m. on May 31, 2017.  eFiling is preferred!  If you need to register to eFile, GO HERE!  It’s easy, quick, and makes filing a breeze.  Get to work — there’s a lot here to comment on!