Legalectric

Oh my… just in, a request to suspend the permitting schedule for Dodge County Wind, the Certificate of Need, the wind site permit, and to WITHDRAW the transmission route permit!

There are 3 Dodge County Wind dockets, a Certificate of Need (17-306), wind siting (17-307), and transmission (17-308).  Process wise, it goes to PUC for approval, and the PUC will probably announce a comment period in all 3 dockets. Then Commission will meet, and approve the withdrawal of the transmission without prejudice, so they can refile when they have a workable plan. That withdrawal process will take some time.

That time is an issue, because I don’t see any way they can come up with a transmission plan and get it through the MISO transmission studies to get a permit and start construction by year end.  Tax credit implications — they have a problem. 

As to the suspension of Certificate of Need and wind siting application proceedings, I’d like to see them dismissed without prejudice also, not suspended, gumming up the works at the Commission.  We shall see.

This transmission was absurd from the get-go, a 345kV line with what, a 2,200MVA capacity, for a 170 MW project? They said it was part of a regional interconnection, from the application:

Oh, really? Don’t see it in the MISO MTEP. It’s not… and it’s a radial line, and you just don’t build short radial 345kV lines!

Here are Dodge County Wind’s requests for suspension and withdrawal:

“On August 9, 2019, DCW withdrew its MISO interconnection queue position no. J441, because of the significant interconnection costs associated with that queue position.”

Oh my… what does the MISO DPP Report have to say about that? Just search this report, issued July 25, 2019, for “J441.”

I figured the PUC should have that MISO report in the record:

And check out the summary page on p. 149 of the 150 page pdf.

After getting the 345kV route alternatives “C” and “D” ejected, not to be considered in the FEIS, this is just the icing on the cake!!

Dodge Center Xmsn – Mission Accomplished!

Here’s some background info from just over a year ago:

Dodge County Wind info presentation

July 29th, 2018

From the very beginning, with Dodge County Concerned Citizens working hard to inform people of the project, all three dockets, and Dodge Center’s Tom Applegate going door to door and encouraging people to write comments and send photos showing how the transmission line would affect their neighborhood in Dodge Center, this public input helped call the entire project into question.  With the DEIS rejecting transmission alternative routes C and D, and with the MISO interconnection study showing so many network upgrades needed at a very high cost, this project is no longer viable.  The people affected by this project have had a tremendous impact.

There’s a “Construction Information Session” happening Thursday, August 22, 2019 in Northwood, Iowa. Plenty of time to prepare!

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.

Friday, Freeborn Wind is before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, where Association of Freeborn County Landowners’ Motions for Reconsideration are on the agenda:

20192-150272-01-1_Motion to Remand to ALJ

UPDATE:

AFCL_Motion-Addendum to Remand to ALJ_FINAL FULL PACKET

Why update? Because we got more juicy details.  As I was filing the “Motion to Remand to ALJ” I got an email from Commerce-EERA’s John Wachtler, and he said that there were no emails, that Commerce deletes them after 90 days.  Well, emails weren’t all that was requested, and yet, NOTHING was produced. NOTHING!

Here’s what we asked for:

Exhibit C_Commerce-Agreement_Data Practices Act Request

Why am I not surprised…