Legalectric

Let me see if I understand this… we’ve got Ingrid Bjorklund, a wind industry lobbyist/employee now Commerce employee and Deb Pile, also Commerce, using Affidavits to argue LEGISLATIVE intent based on statements by Mike Bull, Commerce employee working under Pawlenty’s roof now working for Xcel.   EH?  LEGISLATIVE intent based on industry lobbyist/employee & Exec agency employee hearsay affidavits of Pawlenty’s Energy Boy.  Where’s the LEGISLATURE in legislative intent?  And what does Mike Bull have to say about this?

Duck and cover, Mikey!  Commerce has trained their sights on you!

HUH?  What’s going on?  Well, we just had a deadline for submittals in response to the First Prehearing Order in the AWA Goodhue Wind contested case regarding application of Goodhue County’s Wind Ordinance.  for the whole docket, go to www.puc.state.mn.us and click on “Search eDockets” and search for docket 08-1233.

Here’s the prelude to yesterday’s filings:

PUC’s Order – Referral to OAH

Goodhue County Wind Ordinance

Staff Chart of Differences between Goodhue Ordinance & State Standards prepared for PUC Chair Boyd

After a Prehearing Conference and the ALJ’s request for our positions in this case, we submitted memos and then the ALJ issued a Prehearing Order:

First Prehearing Order

In that order we were asked to set out the differences between county and state standards; whether county ordinance is a conflict, supplement, or something new; whether it should be applicable to this project; material facts regarding this issue; and what evidence we’d introduce. and here’s what was filed — where’s everybody else?  Anyway, read the Deb Pile and Ingrid Bjorklund Affidavits and note who’s sayin’ what, whose interests are at issue, whose intent is couched as “LEGISLATIVE” intent, and while you’re at it, ask just what role they had at that time.  Seems to me they’re putting it all on Mikey Bull.   Hey Mikey?!?!  Get ready!

Goodhue Wind Truth 2nd Prehearing Memo

Belle Creek Township 2nd Prehearing Memo

MOES Comments

MOES Comments – Attachment 1

MOES Comments – PUC Briefing Papers on Goodhue

MOES Comments – Affidavit of Deb Pile

MOES Comments – Affidavit of Ingrid Bjorklund

After four years, finally, the Public Utilities Commission has denied an extension of the old, old permit.  Kenyon Wind was first applied for way back in 2006.  To see the full PUC record, go to www.puc.state.mn.us and go to “Search eDockets” and then search for “06-1445.”  Recently, because their permit was expiring, it was granted and then two years was extended for two years, they came back to the PUC for yet another extension.

Here’s the report from the Red Wing Republican Eagle:

Kenyon Wind project in doubt after state denies permit extension

They haven’t built this project, despite being issued a permit on July 18, 2007, nearly a year after they’d applied.  Since that time, much has changed.  Goodhue County passed its Goodhue County Wind Ordinance.   The laws for Community Based Energy Development (C-BED) have changed, amended each year since it was passed.  And the Kenyon Wind Project has changed:

Here’s the CFER’s Comment:

CFERS Comment

Here’s Kenyon Wind’s comments:

Kenyon Wind Response to Comments

And the PUC denied the permit, 3-2.  Commissioners Pugh, O’Brien and Wergin voting to Chair Boyd and Judge Reha were the two voting against denial of Kenyon Wind’s request for extension.

EEEEEEEEEEEEE-HA!!!  It took four years, but this vaporware project is finally dead!

Today on the PUC’s agenda? AWA Goodhue’s request for Reconsideration of the PUC’s remand to an Administrative Law Judge.

Here’s their remand Order and subsequent filings:

PUC’s Order – Remand to OAH

And from that Order, here’s what the PUC wants from the ALJ:

1. The ALJ assigned to this matter is requested to develop a record on every standard in Article 18 that is more stringent than what the Commission has heretofore applied to LWECS and make recommendations regarding each such standard whether the Commission should adopt it for Large Wind Energy Conversion Systems in Goodhue County. The Commission has identified two such standards in this Order (Section 4 and Section 6) but is not by this Order restricting the ALJ from developing the record and making recommendations regarding additional standards in Article 18 that upon further examination meet the “more stringent” qualification.

2. The ALJ assigned to this matter is requested to allow the parties to develop a factual record on the question of “good cause” as that term appears in Minn. Stat. § 216F.081 and to provide recommendations on whether, with respect to each standard in Article 18 identified in the course of her review as “more stringent” than what the Commission has heretofore applied to LWECS, there is “good cause” for the Commission to not apply the standard to siting LWECS in Goodhue County.

3. As the ALJ addresses the issues identified in the previous two sections, the ALJ is requested to include (but not limited to, by this Order) whether there is sufficient evidence regarding health and safety to support a 10 rotor diameter set-back for non-participating residents and the stray voltage requirements.

To which AWA Goodhue said  …. “NOOOO, we want you to undo that decision” …

AWA Motion – Text only – maps are too big

… and to which we said, “PPFFFFFFFFFFFFFBBBBBT!” …

Goodhue Wind Truth – Response to Motion for Reconsideration

… including a section you really ought to read:

III. THERE IS A SYSTEMIC FLAW IN THE PROCESS BY WHICH MATERIAL INFORMATION IS NOT FORWARDED TO THE COMMISSION

… and from Goodhue County:

Goodhue County – Response – late filed

… and then the AWA Goodhue’s Reply – quite pissy, eh?

AWA Goodhue Reply

… and some others on behalf of AWA:

“Wind on the Wires” Izaak Walton League Comment

GE Energy Comment – late filed

… and PUC staff weighs in:

Staff Briefing Papers (a separate revised cover sheet filed later)

… and then at 8:21 a.m. this morning, served by eFiling, and Document Properties show it wasn’t pdf’d until 4:03… TODD GUERERRO, WHATEVER ARE YOU THINKING… this from AWA Goodhue trying to wiggle into mediation somehow rather than a proceeding before the Administrative Law Judge.  Mediation???  Mediation has it’s place, but… well, anyway, here’s what they said:

AWA Goodhue Last Minute Letter

The Commission was probably not pleased, the timing of that latest filing was duly noted, and after a short discussion about the availability of mediation in any contested case, under the administrative rules it’s always an option, the discussion led by Commissioner Reha, who as an ALJ had mediated the Chisago Transmission Project (were any of the Commissioners around then?  Perhaps Pugh?):

Deal – NSP – Taylors Falls – St. Croix Falls

That’s one result of that mediation, one which I certainly wouldn’t be proud of, because though it did underground down the banks of the St. Croix River, it DOUBLED the capacity, and I don’t think anyone other than our friends at NSP had any clue what dropping voltage but bundling BIG conductors meant.  Well, Art Hughes, Ph. D., of course, but he’s dead… And at the time,  it was disturbing the way ALJ Phyllis Reha and George Crocker were on the stage of the Festival Theatre in St. Croix Falls stumping for the deal and urging Concerned River Valley Citizens to adopt the deal.  WHY, what’s in it for them?  For CRVC, nothing!  And why would Reha and Crocker want CRVC to adopt that deal?  Enough to be promoting it on stage before CRVC?  CRVC said NO, and the rest is history…

So anyway, to make a short story long, the PUC talked about Reconsideration and the referral to OAH a bit, Commissioner Reha mentioned some things she is concerned about as material facts at issue, they expressly stated they did not want to Reconsider, and they all (4, Betsy Wergin was missing) said NO to AWA Goodhue’s Motion for Reconsideration.

Onward!

Except that now there’s a delayed start, we’re missing a Commissioner…

Here’s some notes, we’re taking a break — I’m missing some parts, but here we go:

February 1 ROUGH notes

OK, the “ROUGH notes” are their in toto, but hey, I’ve got something better:

HERE’S THE MEETING – February 1 Agenda Meeting

You may have to download “Silverlight” to view the meeting.

Here’s what just was filed on behalf of Minnesota Coalition for Sensible Siting:

Minnesota Coalition for Sensible Siting – Comments

Exhibit A – CUB-WIEG Petition for Review – Bent Tree

Exhibit B – Canada Health Survey July 20, 2009

Exhibit C – Testimony of Rick James – Tazewell IL

Exhibit D – AEI Wind Turbine Noise Report 2009

Exhibit E – Harding – Wind Turbines, Flicker and Photosensitive Epilepsy

Exhibit F – Failed Suzlon Turbine

Exhibit G – Failed Turbine in Sherman Co, OR

Exhibit H – Wind Worker Casualties

Exhibit I – Murray County Wind Ordinance

Exhibit J – Manitowoc County Wind Ordinance 9-07

Exhibit K – Calumet County Wind Ordinance

Exhibit L – Ridgeville Wind Ordinance

And this was filed by CFERS:

CFERS Comment

To look at all the filings, go to www.puc.state.mn.us and to eDockets and search for docket 09-845.