Legalectric

It’s been a busy week.  First the release of the ALJ Recommendation for the Freeborn Wind Proect:

OAH+80-2500-34633+Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation

In the STrib today, on both Freeborn Wind and the Bent Tree project!:

Administrative Law Judge says PUC should reject Freeborn County wind project

A couple of choice snippets from STrib article:

Dan Litchfield, an Invenergy senior manager, objected to Schlatter’s interpretation of Minnesota’s noise regulations, saying it “is impossible to meet for a wind farm. … Every other wind farm in the state has not been subject to this interpretation.”

and:

“We are trying to understand the ALJ’s recommendation,” said Beth Soholt, executive director of St. Paul-based Wind on the Wires, a wind power advocacy group. “We are concerned about a new direction and what it would do to development.”

Methinks they’re getting the message that wind projects can no longer steamroll communities. It’s time for rulemaking, it’s time for revision of “standards” to something people can live with, it’s time to use proper, applicable, siting criteria, DOH!.

And today was yet another big day, because the Public Utilities Commission approved settlement agreements for two families who have been living under the Bent Tree wind project.  This is the first time in Minnesota that landowners within a wind project have been bought out.

FILED_Bent+Tree+WPL+Settlement+Agr+-+Hagen

FILED_Bent+Tree+WPL+Settlement+Agr+-+Langrud

It’s real.

Here are the Staff Briefing Papers:

Staff Briefing Papers – May 17th meeting

The room was packed, and I hope that the this “first” wasn’t lost on the audience.  Wind has shifted direction.  Are you paying attention?

Sustainable: Planners charting Minnesota’s energy future

Yes, we all know that Mike Bull wrote most of the energy law now in place!  But there’s no mention of those many years of work at House Regulated Industries Committee though…

And we all know that there are some big holes and problems with the wind siting statutes, rules, and standards.  What will it take to get some of the problems worked through, like some respectful wind siting standards?  We’re just starting to see, at long last, after years and years of complaints, some Public Utilities Commission action on wind noise issues.

Bent Tree_Noise Monitoring and Monitoring Report_20179-135856-01

Siting will have to be addressed, because despite sound modeling that says “no problem,” there are indeed problems.  Despite shadow flicker modeling that says “no problem,” there are indeed problems.

Preventative siting is long overdue and needs to start NOW!  And what about those already  affected?  “Buy the Farm” for wind?  It’s overdue.  Action after the fact is not the best of options, prevention is always the key, but for those now attempting to live in untenable circumstances, foisted on them by the nuisance moving into their community, and permitted by the Commission, what are the options?

Wind project in southern Minnesota gets pushback

Hey Mikey, how ’bout helping get to some solutions???

Last night there was a hearing in Mankato on the Xcel Energy rate case (Docket E002/GR-15-826).  Public participation in Public Utilities Commission dockets is supposed to be a happenin’ thang…   But there were no witnesses to question yesterday at the public hearing, and the Xcel representative who was there could not answer questions.  Worse, there was no commitment to have witnesses available to the public at the public hearings, and only advice that the public could attend the evidentiary hearing.  ATTEND?!?  When might we be able to question witnesses?

Sent this Data Practices Act Request this morning to round up the Information Requests and Responses regarding transmission, transmission riders, MISO and FERC:

Data Practices Act Request

Xcel Energy wants to shift its transmission rate recovery from CWIP and AFUDC to general rates, but there was no one there to talk about it.  These are the MVP projects at issue, in Schedule 26A, below, which are worked into MISO tariff and FERC blessed:

And here’s the projects in Schedule 26, below, but hmmmm, no project costs shown (click for larger view):

I entered these exhibits:

Exhibit 1A – XcelCover_e21_Request for Planning Meeting and Dialogue – PUC Docket 14-1055

Exhibit 1B – e21_Initiative_Phase_I_Report_2014 – Xcel Filing PUC Docket 14-1055

Exhibit 2_MISO Schedule 26A Indicative Annual Charges_02262014

Exhibit 3 – FERC EL-14-12-002_ALJ Order – ROE on MISO Transmission

Next meeting I’ll have some more:

e21_MikeBull_Center for Energy and Environment

MISO Schedule 26 Indicative Annual Charges

1Q_Earnings Release Presentation_5-9-2016_1500085150

Investor Presentation – NYC-Boston_3-1-2=16_1001207698

Investor Presentation – NYInvestorMtgs_5-10-2016_1500085349

2015 10K – Xcel Energy

2015 10K – NSP

Back to last night’s hearing…

Check the rules about public participation:

1400.6200 INTERVENTION IN PROCEEDINGS AS PARTY.

Subp. 5.  Participation by public.

The judge may, in the absence of a petition to intervene, nevertheless hear the testimony and receive exhibits from any person at the hearing, or allow a person to note that person’s appearance, or allow a person to question witnesses, but no person shall become, or be deemed to have become, a party by reason of such participation. Persons offering testimony or exhibits may be questioned by parties to the proceeding.

Another, the PUC practice rules:

And yet another:

And this one (though they’ll say it isn’t applicable because a rate case isn’t part o the Power Plant Siting Act):

Remember Xcel’s CapX 2020 peak demand projections of 2.49% annual increase?  How wrong can they be?  And how unjustified was their basis for a Certificate of Need for CapX 2020?  And how are they held accountable for those gross misrepresentations?  This is why the rate case in progress, PUC Docket 15-826, is so important.

I love it when this happens… Xcel Peak Demand is again DOWN!  There’s a trend, and it’s called decreased demand.  Demand has yet to exceed the 2007 peak, and now it’s 8 years…

Here’s the Xcel Energy SEC 10-K filed a couple days ago:

2015 – Xcel Energy 10-K

Is it any wonder they want to get away from a cost based rate a la their “e21 Initiative” scheme?  Particularly now that the bill for CapX 2020 is coming due and their newest rate case (PUC Docket GR-15-826) is now underway?

And the specifics, and note how they inexplicably forecast a 2016 peak of 9,327:

Order to refile exhibits, and Goodhue Wind Truths’ Subpoena requests denied!

Whew — actually it helps.  We got an order yesterday that we need to refile the Testimony.  There’s so much and it doesn’t fit into neat little bundles that can be filed with the eFile system, and I’m glad I wasn’t the only one having trouble with that.

Fourth Prehearing Order – REFILE!

But the denial of the subpoena requests sucks.  MOES had filed Affidavits related to intent, and we’ve not had the opportunity to cross regarding their assertions:

MOES Comments – Affidavit of Ingrid Bjorklund

AWA Goodhue’s Motion for Summary Disposition (see p. 10)

Ingrid Bjorklund was a wind industry lobbyist at the time this was winding through the legislature, yet here she is, as a Commerce employee, making a statement in an Affidavit, under oath, conclusory statements about legislative intent.  EH?  Both documents above contain statements about what Mikey Bull may or may not have said.  What’s Michael Bull got to do with legislative intent?  To borrow a fist-pounding-the-desk phrase from Rep. Dennis Ozment, “I don’t recall electing NSP to the legislature!”  Oh wait, he was there at the Green Chameleon Gov’s behest then…

So I decided to requests subpoenas for both Ingrid Bjorklund and Mike Bull:

Goodhue Wind Truth – Subpoena Requests for Bjorklund and Bull

Are we having fun yet?  Xcel’s Chris Clark seemed to think so when I gave him the heads up at Thursday’s PUC meeting!

Not to worry, folks, the ALJ denied the request…

ALJ Sheehy’s Letter to Overland – Denial of Subpoena Requests

And now, for something completely different… back to reformatting all the exhibits… oh, what I would do for support staff, the grrrrrrrrrls just can’t work a computer without drooling on the keyboard!