Goodhue Wind Docket … REFILE!
March 2nd, 2011
Order to refile exhibits, and Goodhue Wind Truths’ Subpoena requests denied!
Whew — actually it helps. We got an order yesterday that we need to refile the Testimony. There’s so much and it doesn’t fit into neat little bundles that can be filed with the eFile system, and I’m glad I wasn’t the only one having trouble with that.
But the denial of the subpoena requests sucks. MOES had filed Affidavits related to intent, and we’ve not had the opportunity to cross regarding their assertions:
MOES Comments – Affidavit of Ingrid Bjorklund
AWA Goodhue’s Motion for Summary Disposition (see p. 10)
Ingrid Bjorklund was a wind industry lobbyist at the time this was winding through the legislature, yet here she is, as a Commerce employee, making a statement in an Affidavit, under oath, conclusory statements about legislative intent. EH? Both documents above contain statements about what Mikey Bull may or may not have said. What’s Michael Bull got to do with legislative intent? To borrow a fist-pounding-the-desk phrase from Rep. Dennis Ozment, “I don’t recall electing NSP to the legislature!” Oh wait, he was there at the Green Chameleon Gov’s behest then…
So I decided to requests subpoenas for both Ingrid Bjorklund and Mike Bull:
Goodhue Wind Truth – Subpoena Requests for Bjorklund and Bull
Are we having fun yet? Xcel’s Chris Clark seemed to think so when I gave him the heads up at Thursday’s PUC meeting!
Not to worry, folks, the ALJ denied the request…
ALJ Sheehy’s Letter to Overland – Denial of Subpoena Requests
And now, for something completely different… back to reformatting all the exhibits… oh, what I would do for support staff, the grrrrrrrrrls just can’t work a computer without drooling on the keyboard!
Xcel’s 2010 10-K is out!
February 28th, 2011
Yes, you know you’re one sick puppy when you get excited about those SEC alerts in the inbox! Xcel’s 2010 10-K has been filed:
Check p. 11 for the Peak Demand info – yes, it’s up a bit, but we’re lower than 2005, and there’s a long ways to go to the peak in 2006:
Peak demand is not exactly what we should be planning for these days, well, probably anytime, because peak is so rare, and they just try to sell that excess in the valleys, not that there’s a market anywhere else either!
Xcel’s $$$ strategy approved
January 17th, 2011
This came up when our house deal was making life complicated, and then I was off in Colorado, so I didn’t get it posted, now it’s time to catch up!
Xcel went to the PUC for changes in its Capital Organization wiggle-room, and got what they wanted, with some additional reporting requirements.
What I’m noticing is that something like this that ‘s SO important, like the Otter Tail Power “Standstill Agreement,” and like the Otter Tail Power “Standstill Agreement,” there’s enviro silence. Nobody is on this… why?
Xcel Request – 2011 Capital Organization – Part I
Xcel Request – 2011 Capital Organization – Part II
Thankfully Bob Geiger, Finance & Commerce, was:
Utilities fielding $2B in projects for 2011
Posted: 5:17 pm Fri, January 7, 2011
By Bob GeigerWind, transmission line projects part of busy year for power providers
According to documents filed with the MPUC, Xcel plans to pay for the capital projects with short-term debt and multiyear credit agreements, a $300 million long-term debt issue in the third quarter and $190 million in cash.
Read the rest of this entry »
Transmission from La Veta, Colorado
January 12th, 2011
Above is my view of La Veta, Colorado. As I drove in, I saw two deer sauntering, yes, SAUNTERING across a farm field at the edge of town. And in town, they were just walking around like they owned the place, fat and happy. This one above was a buck escorting two of his does, maybe one and last year’s progeny, and they were walking down the streets, through yards, hanging out oh-so-casual.
There are some days, well, most days, I confess, when I really love my job… yesterday was another!
Yesterday was a forum held by TLC, Transmission Line Coalition, last night in La Veta and tonight in Alamosa:
Here’s some of what I had to say:
Xcel, of course, was there, and I’m sure they’ll be there tonight!
Here’s the ALJ Recommendation, this will sound very familiar to those in Minnesota:
As we say in transmission, “IT’S ALL CONNECTED.”
(Pretend there’s a link here to USDA’s RUS EIS page – it’s DOWN DOWN DOWN) NEVERMIND, it’s now UP UP UP! From RUS (note this San Luis project is about 4 months behind Dairyland/Capx:
Tri-State Generation and Transmission
San Luis Valley-Calumet-Comanche Transmission Project – Huerfona, Alamosa and Pueblo Counties, CO – The agency has decided to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement on this proposal; the original level-of-review was an Environmental Assessment.
- Federal Register Notice to hold Scoping Meeting and the intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment (August 3, 2009 – 47 KB)
- Calumet-Comanche Electric System Improvement Project – Macro Corridor Study (May 2009 – 24 MB MB)
- San Luis Valley-Calumet-Comanche Transmission Project – Alternatives Evaluation (June 2009 – 510 KB)
- San Luis Valley Electric System Improvement Project – Alternatives Evaluation and Macro Corridor Study (June 2008 – 14.2 MB)
- Public Scoping Report (November 16, 2009 – 28.6 MB)
What I want to know is WHY they are using lower capacity ACSR conductor for these projects — and the claimed “need” is SO low, why aren’t they just reconductoring the whole system — ACSR, euwwww, that is SO 1960s:
And demand forecasts? Need a good laugh? Here’s the sales forecast for Public Service of Colorado, our good friends at Xcel:
I’ve just learned that this area is mushroom country — methinks that this “forecaster” has been dabbling in some of the more exotic varieties to come up with this chart!
Time to subpoena Mike Bull!!!
December 21st, 2010
Let me see if I understand this… we’ve got Ingrid Bjorklund, a wind industry lobbyist/employee now Commerce employee and Deb Pile, also Commerce, using Affidavits to argue LEGISLATIVE intent based on statements by Mike Bull, Commerce employee working under Pawlenty’s roof now working for Xcel. EH? LEGISLATIVE intent based on industry lobbyist/employee & Exec agency employee hearsay affidavits of Pawlenty’s Energy Boy. Where’s the LEGISLATURE in legislative intent? And what does Mike Bull have to say about this?
Duck and cover, Mikey! Commerce has trained their sights on you!
HUH? What’s going on? Well, we just had a deadline for submittals in response to the First Prehearing Order in the AWA Goodhue Wind contested case regarding application of Goodhue County’s Wind Ordinance. for the whole docket, go to www.puc.state.mn.us and click on “Search eDockets” and search for docket 08-1233.
Here’s the prelude to yesterday’s filings:
Staff Chart of Differences between Goodhue Ordinance & State Standards prepared for PUC Chair Boyd
After a Prehearing Conference and the ALJ’s request for our positions in this case, we submitted memos and then the ALJ issued a Prehearing Order:
In that order we were asked to set out the differences between county and state standards; whether county ordinance is a conflict, supplement, or something new; whether it should be applicable to this project; material facts regarding this issue; and what evidence we’d introduce. and here’s what was filed — where’s everybody else? Anyway, read the Deb Pile and Ingrid Bjorklund Affidavits and note who’s sayin’ what, whose interests are at issue, whose intent is couched as “LEGISLATIVE” intent, and while you’re at it, ask just what role they had at that time. Seems to me they’re putting it all on Mikey Bull. Hey Mikey?!?! Get ready!
Goodhue Wind Truth 2nd Prehearing Memo
Belle Creek Township 2nd Prehearing Memo
MOES Comments – PUC Briefing Papers on Goodhue