PPSA Annual Hearing NOW
November 20th, 2020

RIGHT NOW! It’s the PPSA Annual Hearing… sigh… here we go again.

Go to webex, Event # 146 311 2620. The powerpoint slides will be here (and will also be filed on eDockets).
To be able to comment, you have to get on the phone 866-609-6127, Conference ID: 4449079, and to comment, you need to press #1 and get in queue.
Here is the Commerce info about this year’s projects:
And for the record, folks, note that wind is not exempt from many of the parts of the PPSA:

Line 3 – Exceptions to ALJ’s Report
May 12th, 2018
Today was the deadline for filing Exceptions to the Administrative Law Judge’s Recommendation for Line 3 Certificate of Need and Route. Here’s the ALJ’s Recommendation:
I quick filed an Exception on behalf of Association of Freeborn County Landowners, objecting to inclusion and objecting to any consideration of “System Alternative 04” or SA-04, because no notice was given to landowners in Freeborn County, and well, to any of the landowners along SA-04.
Friends of the Headwaters proposed SA-04, the only “System Alternative” proposed in the Certificate of Need proceeding. … sigh…. foisting it elsewhere is not a good strategy. Search their Exceptions for more info on their rationale – do a search for “SA-04” of this filing:
20185-142900-04_Exceptions – Friends Of The Headwaters
Are there others advocating for AS-04? Looking… it’ll take a bit.
System Alternative SA-04 is noted 139 times in the ALJ’s Recommendation, and is first mentioned on p. 24:
And the Public Utilities Commission accepted it for further evaluation, but no notice was provided:
But no meetings in the area — and still no notice:
… sigh… on it goes…
And regarding the DNR’s take on SA-04 (will find DNR comment):
Here are all the other references to SA-04 in order — the ALJ does reject it, saying it is not a viable alternative:
And then the ALJ considers comments:
The DNR comments are troubling:
Here’s the actual DNR Comment:
The DNR said about SA-04:
And back to the ALJ’s mentions of SA-04:
DNR’s Motion to Quash DENIED!
February 17th, 2018
The DNR changed its logo to the same boring one all MN agencies now use, UGH!
The DNR, after agreeing to a time certain for staff to testified, filed a Motion to Quash!!
WHAT? So I filed a response:
And the Administrative Law Judge told the DNR what they could do with their Motion:
And the meat of it:
Yeah… delightful… Now, can we get at why it is that the DNR, Dept. of Health, and Commerce do not want to testify in this docket? Hmmmmm…
Oh yeah, it’s ramping up. Freeborn Wind hearing soon!
February 9th, 2018
Freeborn Wind Project is ramping up.
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.
OK, fine, whatever… here we go!
Subpoenas ‘R Us! Association of Freeborn Co. Landowners
February 1st, 2018
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:
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
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:
And we reached an agreement:
Oh, but wait… they’re really not wanting that Bent Tree info to get in the record! So once more with feeling:
OK, whatever…
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.
So on we go…
Oh, but wait, the Applicants, Invenergy, also got their $0.02 in, and filed a Motion:
… 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…