Appellate Court says PUC was in error!
November 1st, 2011
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:
It all stemmed from this MemoranDUMB issued by the PUC that was something I’ve never seen the likes of:
Guess they won’t be doing that again, will they!!!
PUC’s Health Impacts of Wind Turbine Docket
January 26th, 2010
9:30 a.m. on February 1, 2010
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
Large Hearing Room
121 – 7th Place E., 3rd Floor
St. Paul, MN 55101
Remember the PUC’s docket that they opened after release of:
Apparently they’re looking at doing something — and here’s what the staff Briefing Papers say:
Here’s how staff defines the issue before the PUC:
Should the Commission find that current permit conditions regarding setbacks remain appropriate and reasonable in light of recent concern and the Minnesota Department of Health’s White Paper, Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines?
And here’s the bottom line, what staff thinks should happen:
Staff recommends that the best approach to mitigate the issues discussed above would be comprised of two modifications to our current process.
1) Increase setbacks from non-participating landowner residences
a. Continue to use the existing 500-foot or noise standard residential setback (whichever is greater) to allow participating landowners to maximum their land use.
b. Increase the setback required from non-participating landowner residences to 1,000 feet or the state noise standard (whichever is greater) or some other number deemed appropriate by the Commission.
2) Require additional information from developers during the siting process to provide accurate and specific information to the Commission on the impacts of the project. Staff will continue to work on refining the specifics of these requests, additional information is anticipated to be (at a minimum, but could be subject to change):
a. During the application process:
I. noise modeling report (at different frequencies and at various distances from the turbines at various wind directions and speeds) throughout the project area;
II. if flicker is to occur on non-participating residences, shadow flicker modeling report, indicating anticipated maximum;
b. Preconstruction (submitted at time of final site layout):
I. final noise modeling report of final layout and noise monitoring proposal (both at different frequencies and at various distances from the turbines at various wind directions and speeds) throughout the project area;
II. final shadow flicker modeling report;
c. Post construction:
I. noise monitoring reports of the development (at different frequencies and at various distances from the turbines at various wind directions and speeds) throughout the project area.
To check out the whole docket and look at the various comments, CLICK HERE FOR PUC SEARCH PAGE , then scroll down a bit to the “Search” button and below that enter 09-845 and then click “Search.” Voila, there it all is!
So, be there or be square.