|
Details 2025-074
| 2 | 1. | | M - Miscellaneous | ** E002,PT7157/ City of Slayton;
SA-25-129 Northern States Power Co. d/b/a Xcel Energy
In the Matter of the Petition of the City of Slayton for the Determination of Compensation for City Acquisition of Xcel Energy Electric Service Territory.
Should the Commission grant the petition for reconsideration and if so, what associated reconsideration actions should the Commission take? (PUC: Noyce)
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. | |
Not available
|
|
13-114
| 7 | 2. | | M - Miscellaneous | ** E,G002/CI-02-2034; Northern States Power Co. d/b/a Xcel Energy
E,G002/M-12-383
In the Matter of an Investigation & Audit of Service Quality Reporting - Fraudwise Report;
In the Matter of the Petition of Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy for Approval of Amendments to its Natural Gas and Electric Service Quality Tariffs Originally Established in Docket No. E, G-002/CI-02-2034.
1. Should the Commission accept Xcel Energy’s Annual 2025 Quality of Service (QSP) Report?
2. Should the Commission find that Xcel Energy exceeded the Customer Complaint metric threshold as set by its QSP tariff?
3. Should the Commission approve Xcel Energy’s proposal to use 50% of the Customer Complaint underperformance penalty for bill credits to past due customers?
4. Should the Commission require a third-party audit of Xcel Energy’s customer billing complaints? (PUC: McShane) | |
Not available
|
|
Details 2026-202
| 1 | 3. | | CI - Commission Initiated Investigation | *** EG002/CI-26-85 Northern States Power Co. d/b/a Xcel Energy
In the Matter of a Commission Investigation into Improving Xcel Energy’s Customer Service Performance.
1. Should the Commission add or modify any customer service requirements to the performance-based regulatory framework that are currently in Xcel Energy’s Quality of Service Plan (QSP)?
2. Should the Commission modify the penalty requirements in the performance-based regulatory framework that are currently in Xcel Energy’s QSP? (PUC: McShane) | |
Not available
|
|
Details 2026-212
| 1 | 4. | | M - Miscellaneous | *** E017/M-26-211 Otter Tail Power Co.
In the Matter of Otter Tail Power Co.’s Petition for Approval of a New Class for Very Large Customers Class and Associated Rate Schedules.
1. Should the Commission approve, reject, or modify Otter Tail Power Company’s proposed structure for establishing Large General Service Tier II based on demand and operational, or adopt an alternative structure?
2. Should the Commission require Otter Tail Power Company (OTP) to submit compliance filings for loads between 20 MW and 75 MW and require loads deemed “system intensive”, consistent with the Commission’s order in Xcel Energy’s large-load docket, or adopt an alternative approach?
3. Should the Commission approve, reject, or modify Otter Tail Power Company’s proposal to establish a new customer class, Large General Service Tier III - High Power Compute (HPC) for customers with firm demand of = 75 MW, or adopt an alternative threshold?
4. Should the Commission require Large General Service Tier III customers to pay all the Transmission and Distribution (T&D) system upgrade costs upfront via Contributi | |
Not available
|