Legalectric

Whew, time to take a breather. We had two briefs due at 1:30 p.m. today, and got them filed with 1/2 hour to spare! Let’s hear it for the power of Doritos! (Only way I got through Contracts and Corporations in law school was a two-fisted supply of Doritos and Haagen Dazs)

Here are our Grant County Intervenor briefs. Here’s the one for the Grant County Solar docket focusing on the CPCN application for that one project, followed by Applicant-Grant County Solar/NextEra:

And our non-party brief in the WP&L acquisition docket for SIX solar projects covering over 5,400 acres, followed by the others:

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

And from NextEra/Grant County Solar, LLC:

Better get this Rebuttal Testimony posted, as it’s almost time for Surrebuttal Testimony! To look at all the filings in the Grant County Solar docket GO HERE TO PSC DOCKET LOOK-UP and search for docket 9804-CE-100.

Grant County Intervenors Rebuttal Testimony:

NextEra Rebuttal Testimony:

Public Service Commission Staff Rebuttal Testimony – NONE!

Dept. of Natural Resources Rebuttal Testimony – NONE!

RENEW Wisconsin Rebuttal Testimony

Grant County Solar, LLC… 1,406 acres, 2,058 acres, full of solar panels, blanketing crop land designated as “Farmland Preservation” land by town and county. Even the Public Service Commission’s Environmental Assessment states that this project is not consistent with local land use designation. Well DOH!

And now we’re off to the races, Intervenor testimony due today.

Whew… piles o’ files… Thank Dog for the internet! Remember when we had to make 15 copies just for the PSC?!?!

Comments are due Sunday, April 14, 2019 (11:59!):

Here’s the DEIS in full:

Note the “need” section beginning on p. 49. It’s dependent on MISO — yes, that MISO, the one that blessed the so dramatically overstated “need” for the CapX 2020 build-out… the MISO that claims “need” when its LMP Coutour map is nearly always a bright or dark blue! The MISO that is all about “market” which has nothing to do with “need.” This section takes it back to “Upper Midwest Transmission Development Initiative” (hard to tell their mission, eh? But we know it was all about coal). If they’re going to go back to the history of this big transmission build-out, methinks that, particularly in Wisconsin, they should go back to the Wisconsin Reliability Assessment Organization (WRAO) Report that laid out the wish list of the transmission build-out.

Now, head to p. 80, Section 3.9, entitled “Applicants’ Alternatives to the Proposed Project.” This section presents ONLY the APPLICANTS’ alternatives, they get to determine what is or is not an alternatives, the parameters. Show me where it says in the WI statutes or rules that it only the APPLICANTS’ choice of alternatives to be considered?

Folks, we’ve got a lot of work to do…