Encourage public participation? Yeah, right…
February 10th, 2016
Here we go, thanks to Xcel Energy and Office of Administrative Hearings, based on the bias and double standards for participation and obstructions to intervention in the latest Xcel Energy rate case (PUC Docket GR-15-826).
Yes, Intervention in the rate case denied again:
And I quote:
Further, the Petition states that purposes for which No CapX 2020 was “specifically formed” (fn omitted) was to participate in dockets which are now closed, raising the question of why No CapX 2020 continues to exist.
H-E-L-L-O?!?!?! This rate case docket is all about shifting the CapX 2020 and MISO MVP 17 project portfolio transmission costs from one scheme to another. I specifically cited all the references to CapX 2020, MISO MVP, and transmission.
Intervention Petition II
Intervention Petition I
20161-117574-01_Order Denying Intervention Petition 1
No CapX 2020_Response to Xcel’s Objection
20161-116957-02_Xcel’s Objection to Intervention
NoCapX 2020 and Carol A. Overland_Intervention Petition Packet
And in a parallel track, note the double standard in pleading.
- Note that Xcel has objected only to the Overland/No CapX 2020 intervention.
- Note that Xcel has not objected to those who participated in the “e21 Initiative” which is the basis for this rate case “multi-year rate plan” and transmission shift.
- Note how little the other “intervenors” say.
- Note they do not state their interests.
- Note they do not state how their interests are different from general ratepayers.
- Note they do not state how their interests will not be represented by OAG and Commerce.
OAH has approved Interventions of “The Commercial Group,” “Suburban Rate Authority,” and “City of Mineapolis.” I’m sure the approval of “Clean Energy Organizations” will soon follow, despite the lack of specific pleading and the apparent conflict with one “attorney” representing so many organizations that either have differing positions and interests, or which are adequately represented by other organizations and don’t need to intervene… funny how this double standard works…
Read the Petitions:
Petition to Intervene of the Commercial Group
Petition to Intervene of Suburban Rate Authority
Petition to Intervene 0f City of Minneapolis
Check out each of these petitions. Look at the pleading, what’s stated, and as importantly, what is NOT stated. What are their interests? How are the “interests” different than general ratepayers in their class? How are their interests not represented by Office of Attorney General and/or MN Dept. of Commerce?
So what to do? Participating in the public hearing is not sufficient, and if that’s the limited offering, well, there’s no Discovery for a public participant. What’s next? Fight for the privilege of an unfunded intervention, as if there’s nothing else to do? The issues raised by Overland/No CapX 2020 will not be addressed otherwise. And thos overt quashing of participation is not consistent with the “public” in “Public Utilities Commission” and the Commission’s mandate.
Meanwhile, FERC just denied the 2010 Petition for Intervention too in the case regarding the cost allocation for these CapX and MISO MVP projects, yes, that took them 5 1/2 years to do, so why now? Check this out:
Odd that should come up now… naaaah, not really.
Xcel’s new rate increase request
November 2nd, 2015
Xcel’s cost of electricity is down. Yet they want more money from us, 9.8% over the next 3 years, with the average residential customer’s 675 kW/hr bill to go up $11 a month. WHAT?
Meanwhile, last year at the legislature, the biggest of the big customers got a special rate category and special lower rates. WHAT?
The above graph is from Chuck Burdick’s testimony — after dealing with him in the Goodhue Wind case, I couldn’t resist checking out his testimony (Application, 2A2 – MYRP).
So if Xcel Energy was authorized a certain ROE, and only earned a much lesser ROE, does that mean we should make up the difference? Also from Burdick’s testimony:
Were this “free market” the response would be that the company should contract, that there are too many cooks in that kitchen, that the capital expenses not for our use, such as this big transmission build-out, should not occur, and we should not have to pay for them.
Let’s take a look at the drivers, where they’re running short — do we want to pay for this? From the Application 1:
The initial filing in this new rate case is there for the reading, dig in, I’m sure there’s something you’ll enjoy.
Just go HERE TO PUC’S SEARCH DOCKETS PAGE and search for PUC docket 15-826, opened today.
In the STrib today:
Xcel seeks 9.8 percent rate hike in Minnesota over three years
ATXI shot down by Missouri Appellate Court
August 11th, 2015
Check out this great slap down of Ameren Transmission Company of Illinois by the Missouri Court of Appeals when Ameren challenged the lower court’s dismissal of their attempt to circumvent state regulation (thanks to Paul Henry for passing this on):
As you know, Missouri is the state that had the wherewithall to declare that Grain Belt Express and its Clean Line was not a utility. In this case, Ameren went in and said, with it seems quite a bit of arrogance, Missouri, don’t touch me, we don’t have to play with you, you don’t regulate me:
WOW, whew, that sure didn’t work for Ameren. Love it when that happens.
Overland’s Plains & Eastern DEIS Comments
April 20th, 2015
Quick comments — this project is bizarre, a private project proposed on request of DOE (with applicant ringleader a former DOE employee) that has no demonstrable need. ???
Here’s the link for the DEIS, from their site:
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Plains & Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project (DOE/EIS–0486; Draft EIS) is now available
I do hope the DOE will explain how they intend to review this under Section 1222… it’s all too bizarre for words!
PJM State of the Market Report – down and out!
March 12th, 2015
An old PJM map, some transmission built since, some plans abandoned, like MAPP!
Today PJM released its “State of the Market” report, and this is something that everyone in the MISO region should read because afterall, that’s their “Target Market.”
2014 State of the Market Report for PJM | Posting Date | |
![]() Volume I (2MB PDF) contains the introduction.Volume II Volume II (14MB PDF) contains detailed analysis and results. |
I LOVE IT WHEN THIS HAPPENS — PJM PEAK DEMAND DOWN 10.1%
And here’s the MISO LMP map so you can see just what the electrical market is doing in real time: