File #: Details 2014-314    Version: Name:
Type: PA - Property Acquisition Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 10/17/2014 In control: PUC Agenda Meeting
On agenda: 4/30/2015 Final action:
Title: ** E001,115,140,105,139, Interstate Power and Light Company; 124,126,145,132,114, Southern Minnesota Electrical Coop 6521,142,135/PA-14- together (the "Joint Petitioners") 322; E001/PA-07-540 In the Matter of a Request for the Approval of the Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement Between Interstate Power and Light Company and Southern Minnesota Energy Cooperative; In the Matter of the Joint Petition for Approval of Transfer of Transmission Assets of Interstate Power and Light Company and ITC Midwest LLC. Is the proposed sale consistent with the public interest? Should the Commission request additional information? Is a contested case proceeding necessary? Should the Commission approve the proposed transaction? If so, should approval be subject to conditions? How should IPL return the remaining ATA to customers? (PUC: Kaml, Alonso, Dasinger, Twite)
Attachments: 1. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14, 2. MCC IR Nos 14-42 11-17-14, 3. IPL and SMEC Petition (cover letter - att D) 4-15-14 PUBLIC, 4. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT A-C, 5. IPL & SMEC Revised Objection to Late IRs 11-18-14, 6. MCC Response 11-20-14, 7. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT D PUBLIC, 8. MCC IR Nos. 43-58 11-21-14, 9. IPL and SMEC Petition (att E - U) 4-15-14 PUBLIC, 10. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT E-P, 11. Briefing Papers, 12. Briefing Papers, 13. PUC Order Requiring Add’l Record Development 6-30-14, 14. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT Q1, 15. Joint Petitioners Response to Commission 8-1-14, 16. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT Q2, 17. Joint Petitioners Supplemental Response to PUC 9-4-14, 18. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT R-T, 19. DOC Reply Comments 10-6-14, 20. OAG Reply Comments 10-6-14, 21. IPL and SMEC Petition 4-15-14 ATT U PUBLIC, 22. MMUA Reply Comments 10-6-14, 23. OAG Comments 5-9-14, 24. PUC Notice of Additional Comment Period 10-10-14, 25. MMUA Comments 5-9-14, 26. Joint Petitioners Response to PUC Notice 11-10-14, 27. DOC Comments 5-12-14, 28. DOC Supplemental Reply Comments 11-10-14, 29. IPL and SMEC Reply Comments 5-23-14, 30. OAG Response to PUC Notice 11-10-14, 31. PUC Order Requiring Additional Record Development 6-30-14, 32. PUC Order Directing Public Hearings to be Held 11-18-14, 33. DOC Reply Comments 10-6-14, 34. DOC Reply Comments 12-8-14, 35. OAG Reply Comments 10-6-14, 36. Joint Petitioners Reply Comments 12-8-14, 37. MMUA Reply Comments 10-6-14, 38. OAG Reply Comments 12-8-14, 39. Briefing Papers, 40. MCC Reply Comments 12-8-14, 41. MMUA Reply Comments 12-8-14, 42. DOC Reply Comments 12-22-14, 43. Joint Petitioners Reply Comments 12-22-14, 44. OAG Reply Comments 12-22-14, 45. IPL Compliance Informational Filing-dkts 07-540 and 10-276 2-27-15, 46. DOC Corrected Reply Comments 2-9-15, 47. DOC Letter 3-12-15, 48. Joint Petitioners Letter 3-18-15, 49. IPL Letter Referencing Compliance Info Filing-dkts 07-540 and 10-276 3-18-15, 50. IPL Errata 3-19-15, 51. IPL Distribution Plant Breakdown 4-3-15, 52. IPL ATA Compliance Informational Filing 07-540 and 10-276 2-27-15, 53. DOC Comments 07-540 and 10-276 4-8-15, 54. Briefing Papers, 55. Amended Briefing Papers
title
**      E001,115,140,105,139,      Interstate Power and Light Company;
      124,126,145,132,114,      Southern Minnesota Electrical Coop
      6521,142,135/PA-14-      together (the "Joint Petitioners")
      322;
      E001/PA-07-540
In the Matter of a Request for the Approval of the Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement Between Interstate Power and Light Company and Southern Minnesota Energy Cooperative;
In the Matter of the Joint Petition for Approval of Transfer of Transmission Assets of Interstate Power and Light Company and ITC Midwest LLC.
 
Is the proposed sale consistent with the public interest?
Should the Commission request additional information?
Is a contested case proceeding necessary?
Should the Commission approve the proposed transaction?
If so, should approval be subject to conditions?
How should IPL return the remaining ATA to customers? (PUC: Kaml, Alonso, Dasinger, Twite)