Compliance filing for CoN Order Point 4!

Filed under:St.Cloud-Monticello — posted by admin on September 7, 2010 @ 1:32 pm

Seems that on August 20th, Mike Krikava filed the Compliance Filing for the Certificate of Need Order Point 4 for the Fargo “Phase I” Route, otherwise known as St. Cloud-Monticello (09-246).  I’ve not been following that docket much, so I didn’t find it until this morning when I was looking at the CapX 2020 site to see what’s there.  And for some odd reason I didn’t get notice that it had been filed in 06-1115.   Hmmmmmm…

OK, let’s take a look at this.

First, I see it’s on “CapX 2020” letterhead.  EH?  CapX 2020 doesn’t exist as an organizational entity!  Search for yourself and see:

Secretary of State Business Name Search

Anyway, here’s their compliance filing:

Compliance Filing – CoN Order Point 4 – (St. Cloud to Monticello only)

And right after that, the PUC files their Order this a.m. on the many Motions in the CoN docket regarding Brookings, primarily denying our Motion to Compel and denying hearings:

PUC Order Denying Motion to Compel… Sept 3, 2010

Here’s Order Point 4 from the Certificate of Need, that Order Point that requires they disclose the ownership structure and capacity of the line, that little Order Point that I’ve been harping on for how long now, because DUH, the capacity they testified to in the CoN is a lot different than what they’re saying it is in these routing proceedings and a lot higher than is showing up in the EMF charts in MOES bogus “environmental review.”  Back to Order Point 4:

orderpoint4What I’m mostly concerned about is the capacity, which was straightforwardly declared in the Certificate of Need proceeding (Docket 06-1115) but which has been hidden and misrepresented in the routing dockets. Here’s what their compliance filing says:

capacity

Here’s what the claim is in EMF charts for the St. Cloud to Monticello line:

emf-chart

And here’s what I wrote about that:

emfcomment



image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace