withdraw

Today was Deadline #1 for Comments on NDPC’s Petition for Withdrawal of the Sandpiper pipeline Certificate of Need and Route applications.  Here’s what was filed:

Sandpiper_Landowner Comments_Xmsn

Yup, that’s it.  My Sandpiper transmission clients weighed in.  I’ve been watching the docket, watching the inbox for service…. NO other comments, nothing, nada…

Just get to it.  Quick – take a few minutes and send a missive to the Public Utilities Commission encouraging them to allow Enbridge to withdraw their application for the Sandpiper pipeline WITH PREJUDICE so that they can’t refile it again.  Send to:

Daniel P. Wolf, Executive Secretary  (dan.wolf@state.mn.us)                        Minnesota Public Utilities Commission                                                           121 Seventh Place East, Suite 350                                                                    Saint Paul, MN  55101-2147

Ann O’Reilly and James La Fave, Administrative Law Judges
Office of Administrative Hearings
600 North Robert Street
P.O. Box 64620
St. Paul, MN 55164-0620

But it doesn’t end there, with zip comments… it gets weirder.  I’d saw there was no notice from the PUC about a comment period, nothing.  Here’s what they did with Hollydale, Notice, and there was a comment period and reply comments!  In that docket, Xcel Energy filed to withdraw its Hollydale applications on December 10, 2013, and this notice was issued on January 10, 2014:

20141-95340-02 Notice of Comment Period

Here’s what we got:

topics

And when I asked:

cao2puc

Here’s the response:

puc2cao

Oh my… what do I do with that?  Guess I write a post about it!!!

withdraw

 

 

 

pickens0408

YES!  The Appellate Court agreed with us in the AWA Goodhue (T. Boone Pickens) appeal!  The appeals have been dismissed as premature, that we can/should file AFTER the Public Utilities Commission decides on the several pending Motions for Reconsideration.  We have been invited to file again, with no additional filing fees. GOOD.  That’s a reasonable decision and we’re not out the filing fees (I’d asked the Court for costs, out of the PUC’s hide, but this is sufficient).

Reconsideration Motions will be heard on November 10, 2011, not before 10:00 a.m. at the Public Utilities Commission, 121 – 7th Place East (3rd Floor Large Hearing Room), St. Paul, MN  55101.

This Appellate Court Order is a good outcome, the court agreeing that the PUC’s position that we had to appeal by September 22, 2011 or lose our opportunity to appeal was not grounded in law.

Here’s the choice nugget:

The general provisions of chapter 14 do not supersede more specific provisions governing appeals from the public utilities commission. In re Complaint Against N. States Power Co., 447 N.W.2d 614, 615 (Minn. App. 1989), review denied (Minn. Dec. 15, 1989). The more specific provision controls. Id.

DUH!!!  SNORT!!!!  And the entire Order, hot off the press:

Appellate Court Order to Dismiss – November 1, 2011

It all stemmed from this MemoranDUMB issued by the PUC that was something I’ve never seen the likes of:

PUC Memorandum saying FILE APPEAL OR ELSE!

Guess they won’t be doing that again, will they!!!

troekatie_t180 Katie Troe, Safe Wind in Freeborn County

Tomorrow at 4:30 p.m. is the deadline for Comments on the Bent Tree Wind Farm Certificate of Need and Siting docket.  This is the 200-400MW wind project that Wisconsin Power & Light wants to build in MINNESOTA for credit towards the Wisconsin Renewable Electricity Standard.

QUICK, send your comments to:

Steve.Mihalchick [at] state.mn.us

For the PUC’s sites, go to www.puc.state.mn.us

Then click on the blue “eDocket” button…

… and search for dockets

08-573 for Siting Docket

07-1425 for Certificate of Need

And there’s also Commerce’s Siting page:

Dept. of Commerce Bent Tree Project Page

Remember, this is the one that, together with one in Clay County, triggered this White Paper:

MN Dept of Health – Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines

Here’s another story in the Albert Lea Tribune with a great “I think they need professional help” quote from Katie Troe:

Safe Wind lobbies state over turbines

By Jason Schoonover | Albert Lea Tribune

Published Monday, July 13, 2009

After a public hearing June 29, Safe Wind of Freeborn County is continuing to work to influence the placement of the turbines for the Bent Tree Wind Farm in Freeborn County.

Wisconsin regulators last week gave their permission for Wisconsin Power & Light to build the wind farm, though now it needs Minnesota approval.

Safe Wind is working to get its message out before the state Public Utilities Commission decides later this summer whether to approve the site permit and certificate of need for the project, which if passed would give the green light to construction.

One of the biggest concerns of Safe Wind is the health effects of the noise produced by the wind turbines. Katie Troe of Safe Wind said the turbines produce noises that can both be heard, and low-frequency sounds that some studies say are amplified and trapped in homes. Troe said some of the sound is audible and some is not.

Read the rest of this entry »