First bunch of NoCapX IRs for MISO
As you know, MISO, Midwest Independent System Operator, intervened in the CapX 2020 docket. So now it’s time to fire off a few Information Requests to them:
The fun never sets…
Intervenors and Stay of Testimony Deadline
New Prehearing Order in the CapX 2020 transmission proceeding at the PUC.
Two main issues. First, Citizens Energy Task Force and MISO are Intervenors. Second, there’s a stay of the deadline to submit Direct Testimony and another Prehearing Conference:
Prehearing Conference
May 2, 2008 @ 9:30 a.m.
PUC Large Hearing Room
121 – 7th Place E.
St. Paul, Minnesota
More maps for CapX 2020
More maps were filed when the Dept. of Commerce, or is it MOES, filed the Environmental Report. Here’s a link for the maps:
Read it and weep… naaaaaah, read it and wonder why they bother.
NAWO Petition for Extension for Direct Testimony
Here’s the other issue popping up — NAWO and ILSR want more time for filing of Direct Testimony, it’s due April 30, according to the Prehearing Order from January. But things happen, and now we’ve got MOES inviting MISO to Intervene and they have, and we’ve all got a lot of Discovery questions for them and it takes time to get that to them and to get a response, even if timely, back from MISO. Another issue is that it’s taking the applicants a while to come up with the Responses to all of the Information Requests. It’s detailed, and excruciatingly mind-numbing or deliriously fun (depending on your perspective). Which means that things need more time. Given the huge project, I’m not convinced that there’s any way to handle this in anywhere’s near the timeframe that Xcel/GRE expects. So, bring on the delays:
And I think that sounds like a good idea, perfectly reasonable, so it’s time to join the party…
Interventions in CapX 2020 docket
I’ve got a lot of catching up to do here, but I’m getting settled in and starting on the pile.
First, there have been two more interventions in the CapX docket, that of the Citizens Energy Task Force, and that of MISO. I tried to get through to Bev Topp about how service is done, but her email bounced back, “mailbox full,” so that didn’t work, and I see now that the ALJ fired off a missive about it. The CETF Petition is straightforward, although I don’t see their interest distinguished from, say, that of UCAN or NoCAPX2020:
Our good friends at MOES sent another of their letters, asking that MISO intervene in this docket:
That letter is a bit odd, where MOES is not a party, yet is asking a stakeholder with a vested interest, transmission planners planning transmission, to join in the fray:
To be clear, OES is not requesting that the Midwest ISO consider advocating for or against the project. The true value of the Midwest ISO’s involvement, in OES’ view, is to provide clear impartial background information, where needed, regarding electric transmission operations, markets and industry challenges as well as information directly pertinent to this case.
I think that you will agree that in its oversight and planning role as the independent transmission system operator of the bulk transmission system in the Midwest region, together with its considerable overall energy expertise, the Midwest ISO is uniquely positioned to assess or comment on electric transmission proposals such as this.
What’s weird about it? Well, it’s not exactly clear and impartial when what transmission planners do is to plan transmission. They’re looking for a particular thing, through particular lenses, so all they see is transmission.
And then what does MISO do but join in the fray, just as requested:
There they go, saying they’ll provide valuable and useful information in an independent, impartial manner. Uh-huh… OK. and they say that a focus is transmission “expansion” and that:
The Midwest ISO does not — and cannot — have a bias in favor of or opposed to any particular form of energy, unlike at least some of the intervening parties which have stated policy agendas for specific forms or means of meeting electric service demands.
Now let’s just think about this a second. It’s true that they can’t have a bias to any particular FORM of energy, but the certainly have a bias for transmission! As an engineer, whose name I can’t recall, once said about energy needs, “If all you’re looking at is transmission, you’ll have a transmission solution.” Yup.
The good news about this is that it’s great to have some free experts testifying, those of us who can’t afford electrical engineers are most appreciative. But damn… I was hoping to subpoena them! That’s always more fun. I want them to explain line loss, walk through the formula… and about those new coal generators waiting in the MISO queue… and… gentlemen, get your pencils and calculators ready!
To look at everything filed in the docket, go HERE and search for docket 06-1115.
Lots of Discovery responses in!
I’ve gotten five CD’s worth of responses to Information Requests from Xcel, soooooooo, I’ll have a bunch of catching up to do here, and I’ll be posting it little by little. Patience…
Seems to me something we need is a spreadsheet of topics covered, and I’ll get that going too. A good activity for a rainy day (in Delaware… what’s it doing in MN?)
CapX transmission “Environmental Report” available
The most recent release in the Most Disappointing Documents category is the “Environmental Report” for the CapX 2020 transmission project. It’s out now, so John Bailey was kind enough to say… knowing the response I’d have… YAWN!!! And it’s from our good friends at the Dept. of Commerce.
Drumroll please… HERE IT IS:
Yawn… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
And if you can get the Maps to open up, do let me know your secret!