Oh my, take a little time off, and look what happens!

Cardinal-Hickory Creek: Secret messages with former regulator prompt utilities to seek new permit for power line

Here are the Petitions from ITC and ATC filed Monday, June 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. and 10:09 a.m.:

And it’s instantly on the agenda for TOMORROW’S Commission meeting (meeting starts at 10:30 a.m.).

Listen to Live Broadcast HERE!

The “notice” was provided on Tuesday. June 29, 2021 at 3:15 p.m., not even 36 hours before the meeting (note there’s a “CS memorandum of 6/29” where Commission staff offers background and suggestions that we don’t get to see):

OBJECTION!!! Ja, you betcha, from Jewell Jinkins Intervenors and others:

What are we asking for? It’s pretty simple:

DALC and WWF filing just came in and they have a very different take:

And ATC and ITC’s scheme is getting some coverage:

Controversial transmission line through Iowa/Wisconsin suffers setback

Owners Of Controversial Power Line Project Ask To Refile Application After Messages With Regulator Surface

CANCELLED – TOMORROW’S MEETING HAS BEEN CANCELLED. Received phone call from PSC Counsel, and it’s on their event calendar.


TOMORROW! Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC) is set to decide whether the 300 MW Badger Hollow solar project should be issued a CPCN. This is the biggest solar project in the Midwest, and it’s proposed for prime ag land, in “Exclusive Agricultural” zoning, and the PSC has NO solar siting rules. WHAT? We tried, filed a Petition for Rulemaking, but they tossed it out. Who needs rules for siting…

Something I don’t understand about Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission — they don’t give adequate notice for their meetings. I checked yesterday, nada, but today, the notice for TOMORROW’S meeting is now posted.

We’re items 6-8. The meeting starts at 10:30 a.m. (oh my, another early start this week!), and I’ve seen them ram through docket after docket at breakneck speed, sooooo, heading east at “too early o’clock.”

To check the dockets for these projects, go to HERE: PSC HOME PAGE SEARCH and search for:

  • Project-Site CPCN: 9697-CE-100
  • Project-Transmission: CPCN 9697-CE-101
  • Acquisition Docket: 5-BS-228


shame_shaking_finger

Shame, shame, shame, Xcel…

Remember way back when, Chisago II, when then Northern States Power did a deal with the City of Taylors Falls and the City of St. Croix Falls?  I won’t forget the cities’ joint siging meeting, because the then Mayor of St. Croix Falls, now a felon, ordered me arrested when I inquired during public comment period about the “Project Mitigation Fund and Committee.”  Guess he didn’t want that discussed, didn’t want it questioned… thanks to all the hollering from the audience I didn’t end up with three hots and a cot!

Deal – NSP – Taylors Falls – St. Croix Falls

This was a three way deal.  Well, Xcel has just unilaterally, without permission of Taylors Falls and St. Croix Falls, altered provisions of the construction specifics that were material terms of the agreement.

From the agreement:

ug2river

See???  Undergrounding “to the existing dam facility on the St. Croix River…”

Simple enough… but here’s what it says in the PUC Order of February 20, 2008:

permitp4segment6

… and..

.permitp4segment7

So in the agreement, it is undergrounded all the way to the river, and in the PUC Order, it’s above ground from Hwy. 95 to the river on H-frame structures.  EH?  Well, what does that look like?  Here’s the map:

photomap

Off to the right, the wider road where there’s a box pointing downward at the wider road where it says “UG Termination Structures” and the line representing transmission changes to sort of a weird dashed line just after the road, that’s Hwy 95 where just east of the highway, it changes from underground to overhead.  If you follow it from Hwy. 95 to the right, east, you’ll see it go over County Road 16, Wild Mountain Road and then over to the St. Croix River.

What does Taylors Falls think about it?  They’re unhappy enough to have rattled Xcel’s cage, and got this response from Xcel:

Xcel’s letter to Mayor Buchite – March 26, 2009

Xcel’s explanation why transmission line was overhead when it was supposed to be underground is… well… read it for yourself:

whyoh

Oh, right, Xcel, because you got everyone together EXCEPT those who are party to the agreement and they agreed, yeah, seems like it’s OK… uh-huh…

I think a better response: “THAT’S DIFFERENT!”

Should the settlement agreement be amended?  Xcel has this to say:

amendsett

Xcel says there’s no need to amend the settlement agreement and that they’ve “complied with all of the provisions relative to Taylors Falls.”  Oh… uh-huh…

St. Croix Falls, the other party to the agreement, is outraged!  They took it to Congressman Obey:

St. Croix Falls letter to Rep. Obey – March 31, 2009

Can you hear their eyeballs rolling, hands thrown up in disgust?

stcf-obeyoutrage

And what’s this about the school in St. Croix Falls?????

Xcel is getting a little too big for its britches!