|
|
Meeting date/time:
|
3/24/2016
9:30 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Meeting location:
|
Large Hearing Room
|
|
Attachments:
|
View Case Record RV-16-47, View Case Record RV-16-49, View Case Record SA-16-58, View Case Record SA-16-22, View Case Record M-16-40, View Case Record GR-15-1033, View Case Record MR-15-1034, View Case Record CN-16-140, View Case Record CN-13-473, View Case Record PPL-13-474, View Case Record CN-14-916, View Case Record PPL-15-137
|
|
Details 2016-038
| 1 | 1. | | RV - Revocation Investigation | * P6445/RV-16-47 IBFA Acquisition Company, LLC
In the Matter of the Revocation of IBFA Acquisition Company, LLC’s Certificate of Authority. (PUC: Rebholz; DOC: Linscheid) NOTE: the Company did not file reply comments. Staff supports the DOC’s recommendation to revoke the Company’s authority. | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-039
| 1 | 2. | | RV - Revocation Investigation | * P6598/RV-16-49 Yestel USA, Inc.
In the Matter of the Revocation of Yestel USA, Inc.’s Certificate of Authority. (PUC: Rebholz; DOC: Linscheid) NOTE: the Company did not file reply comments. Staff supports the DOC’s recommendation to revoke the Company’s authority. | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-033
| 1 | 3. | | SA - Service Area | E234,101/SA-16-58 Elk River Municipal Utilities;
Connexus Energy
In the Matter of the Joint Request of Elk River Municipal Utilities and Connexus Energy, Collectively the Parties, to Modify Electric Service Territory Boundaries. (PUC: Twite; DOC: Lusti) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-034
| 1 | 4. | | SA - Service Area | E287,002/SA-16-22 City of North St. Paul;
Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy
In the Matter of the Joint Request of the City of North St. Paul and Northern States Power Company (d/b/a Xcel Energy) for Approval to Terminate a Service Exception Agreement. (PUC: Fournier; DOC: Lusti) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-042
| 1 | 5. | | M - Miscellaneous | * G002/M-16-40 Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy
In the Matter of the Petition of Northern States Power Company (Xcel) for Approval of Extension Surcharge (ES) for Ulen, Hitterdal, and Surrounding Communities.
Should the Commission approve Northern States Power Company's (Xcel)
proposed Extension Surcharge (ES) rider for the communities of Ulen, Hitterdal, and the Surrounding Areas?
Should the Commission approve Xcel's proposed 75 foot service line extension allowance for its NAS/ES riders' tariff sheets?
Should the Commission approve Xcel's proposed Assignment and Assumption Agreement between Greater Minnesota Transmission (GMT), West Central AG Services, and Xcel?
Should the Commission accept Xcel's proposed revision of the service area for the Barnesville and Holdingford ES riders approved in Docket Nos. G-002/M-14-583 and G-002/M-15-195?
Should the Commission accept Xcel's proposal to continue its annual NAS/ES project reporting requirements on March 1 of each year, pursuant to Docket No. G-002/M-14-583? (PUC: Brill) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-043
| 1 | 6. | | GR - General Rate | ** E017/GR-15-1033 Otter Tail Power Company
In the Matter of the Application of Otter Tail Power Company for Authority to Increase Rates for Electric Service in Minnesota.
1. Does Otter Tail’s March 30, 2018 Decoupling Report comply with the Commission’s May 1, 2017 Order?
2. Has Otter Tail’s Decoupling Report provided enough historical analysis to assess ratepayer impact had decoupling been in place?
3. Should the Commission order implementation of a decoupling pilot for Otter Tail?
4. If the Commission orders implementation, what type of decoupling pilot should be implemented, what customer classes should be included and when should decoupling go into effect?
5. Are there other issues or concerns related to this matter? (PUC: Hetherington, Alonso) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-044
| 1 | 7. | | MR - Fuel Clause Adjustment /Refund | * E017/MR-15-1034 Otter Tail Power Company
In the Matter of the Application of Otter Tail Power Company for Approval of a New Base Cost of Energy.
Should the Commission approve Otter Tail’s proposed new base cost of energy? (PUC: Alonso, Bender) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2016-041
| 1 | 8. | | M - Miscellaneous | * IP6959/CN-16-140 Red Pine Wind, LLC
In the Matter of the Application of Red Pine Wind, LLC for a Certificate of Need for the up to 200.1 megawatt Red Pine Wind Project in Lincoln County, Minnesota.
Should the Commission accept Red Pine Wind, LLC’s request to withdraw its certificate of need application for the Red Pine Wind Project with conditions? (PUC: DeBleeckere) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2013-414
| 13 | 9. | | CN - Certificate of Need | ** PL6668/CN-13-473; North Dakota Pipeline Company LLC
PL6668/PPL-13-474
In the Matter of the Application of North Dakota Pipeline Company LLC for a Certificate of Need for the Sandpiper Pipeline Project in Minnesota;
In the Matter of the Application of North Dakota Pipeline Company LLC for a Pipeline Routing Permit for the Sandpiper Pipeline Project in Minnesota.
Whether the Commission should consider imposing conditions on North Dakota Pipeline Company’s request to withdraw its certificate of need and route permit applications for its proposed Sandpiper Pipeline Project. (PUC: Ek) | |
Action details
|
|
Details 2015-134
| 3 | 10. | | CN - Certificate of Need | ** PL9/CN-14-916; Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership
PL9/PPL-15-137;
PL9/C-20-801
In the Matter of the Application of Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, for a Certificate of Need and Route Permit for the Proposed Line 3 Replacement Project in Minnesota from the North Dakota Border to the Wisconsin Border;
In the Matter of Honor the Earth’s October 27, 2020 Petition for Investigation and Complaint Concerning the Capacity of the Enbridge Mainline System.
Should the Commission reconsider its December 9, 2020 Order Denying Motion for Stay Pending Appeal? (PUC: Ek)
The Commission has the authority to accept or decline a petition for reconsideration with or without a hearing or oral argument (Minnesota Rules 7829.3000, Subpart 6) In other words, a decision on a petition for reconsideration can be made without taking oral comments at the Commission meeting. | |
Action details
|
|
|