1
00:00:03,280 --> 00:00:23,420
Good morning, everyone. Today is Thursday, August 20th, 2026. This is an agenda meeting in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. My name is Katie Seben. I chair the Commission. And I'll take the roll of the other commissioners who are present. Commissioner Pertridge here. Commissioner Ham. Commissioner Sullivan.

2
00:00:23,420 --> 00:00:24,320
President.

3
00:00:25,140 --> 00:00:25,560
Commissioner Tuma.

4
00:00:25,740 --> 00:00:26,480
Of here.

5
00:00:26,760 --> 00:00:27,920
A quorum is present.

6
00:00:28,420 --> 00:00:34,960
Before we begin with our full agenda today, I'd just like to take a moment to recognize

7
00:00:34,960 --> 00:00:40,740
Mark Fornier, who's at the back of the room and has a docket up later this afternoon.

8
00:00:41,520 --> 00:00:42,760
Thanks for standing Mark.

9
00:00:43,680 --> 00:00:47,080
It's his last day with a public utilities commission.

10
00:00:47,760 --> 00:00:51,840
Mark has served us with distinction since 1989.

11
00:00:51,840 --> 00:01:10,160
And for many of those years, he was an analyst in the telecom unit, helping guide the commission through the implementation of the Federal 1996 Telecom Act, which required state commissions to introduce competition and emerging technologies in the telecom space.

12
00:01:10,160 --> 00:01:18,660
From 2013 to 2016, as Energy Work was increasing, Mark worked exclusively on energy

13
00:01:18,660 --> 00:01:24,880
documents, including gas and electric service quality, sip writers, and cooperative resource

14
00:01:24,880 --> 00:01:25,540
plans.

15
00:01:26,180 --> 00:01:32,120
He then began easing back into Telecom and his expertise has helped us shape our evolving

16
00:01:32,120 --> 00:01:32,620
work.

17
00:01:33,320 --> 00:01:39,700
So thank you for your work on more than 1,300 documents during your time at the Commission.

18
00:01:40,340 --> 00:01:45,900
Thank you, Mark, I'll turn it over to Commissioner Tuma, who also wanted to thank you for your service.

19
00:01:46,220 --> 00:01:49,780
Mark, I really appreciate working with you, you're just a steady keel.

20
00:01:50,060 --> 00:01:53,960
That's why I always think, and very steady, always have good advice.

21
00:01:54,540 --> 00:02:00,220
I took over the telecom stuff from Lift Shultz House, Clueless, and you have been just a rock

22
00:02:00,220 --> 00:02:04,720
to work with. I can't tell you how much I've appreciated the time I've had with you,

23
00:02:04,720 --> 00:02:06,560
and understanding how the process works.

24
00:02:06,560 --> 00:02:08,600
and thank you for your service.

25
00:02:08,780 --> 00:02:09,420
It's been wonderful.

26
00:02:09,700 --> 00:02:11,700
I hope you have a good time.

27
00:02:11,960 --> 00:02:14,040
Get a catch a lot of fish and do a lot of good things.

28
00:02:14,960 --> 00:02:15,980
So thank you so much.

29
00:02:25,190 --> 00:02:29,470
OK, our first docate today will be introduced by Jacques Carvo.

30
00:02:30,450 --> 00:02:33,050
Please introduce docate number one.

31
00:02:34,830 --> 00:02:36,350
Good morning, Chair Steven and commissioners.

32
00:02:36,430 --> 00:02:40,910
Item number one is docate number ESS26184 involving

33
00:02:40,910 --> 00:02:47,650
L-S-P-C-G storage L-L-C in the matter of their application for a site permit for the up-to-80

34
00:02:47,650 --> 00:02:51,650
megawatt Cottage Grove Best Project and Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota.

35
00:02:52,790 --> 00:02:56,290
The questions before the commission are, should the commission require an addendum to the

36
00:02:56,290 --> 00:02:58,250
environmental assessment for the project?

37
00:02:58,690 --> 00:03:02,930
If an addendum is required, should the commission authorize the executive secretary to approve

38
00:03:02,930 --> 00:03:05,110
the scope of an EAA addendum?

39
00:03:05,750 --> 00:03:09,550
If an addendum is required, should the commission extend the six months statutory deadline for

40
00:03:09,550 --> 00:03:14,550
commission to make a decision, not to exceed nine months, should the commission issue the draft

41
00:03:14,550 --> 00:03:18,750
site permit prepared by energy infrastructure permitting staff, including the proposed special

42
00:03:18,750 --> 00:03:23,010
permit conditions, and should the commission request that an administrative lodge judge from the

43
00:03:23,010 --> 00:03:26,530
Court of Administrative Hearings conduct public hearings for the project and prepare some

44
00:03:26,530 --> 00:03:32,810
summary of public testimony as expeditiously as possible. Staff has the following open remarks.

45
00:03:32,810 --> 00:03:35,490
The briefing paper on page 9 mentions updates,

46
00:03:35,750 --> 00:03:42,830
the sections 1, 2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3 and 4 of the draft site permit, staff notes.

47
00:03:43,070 --> 00:03:46,250
There is no section 2.2 or 2.3 in the draft permit.

48
00:03:46,910 --> 00:03:49,670
Staff has no further remarks and is available for questions.

49
00:03:50,050 --> 00:03:50,810
Thank you.

50
00:03:51,110 --> 00:03:51,650
Thank you.

51
00:03:51,730 --> 00:03:54,890
If the parties could come forward, please.

52
00:03:55,110 --> 00:03:58,170
We'll begin with questions from commissioners.

53
00:03:59,630 --> 00:04:01,190
The applicant's online, I guess.

54
00:04:02,170 --> 00:04:03,950
So commissioner Sullivan

55
00:04:06,100 --> 00:04:10,260
just even I don't have any questions at this point in time

56
00:04:10,260 --> 00:04:15,360
I'm ready to make a motion whenever you're ready. I know that

57
00:04:16,940 --> 00:04:20,520
You know, I guess the only thing I would ask is if the

58
00:04:20,520 --> 00:04:26,740
If the city has any concerns, I think the city is is squared away, but

59
00:04:26,740 --> 00:04:29,840
I think

60
00:04:29,840 --> 00:04:35,740
Ms. Sabatka is there from the city or who's online from the city of Cottage Grove?

61
00:04:35,900 --> 00:04:41,540
Have you could please turn your camera on if you are or speak up?

62
00:04:44,640 --> 00:04:49,460
Yes, so that's me. So, I'm a Sabatka from City of Cottage Grove. I'm a Lannis Sabatka, the Assistant City Engineer.

63
00:04:50,020 --> 00:04:54,360
As a whole, the city appreciates the commission for including the comments that we had shared

64
00:04:54,360 --> 00:04:56,740
on my acknowledging their requirements with the city.

65
00:04:57,020 --> 00:04:59,180
We appreciate the collaboration and the coordination and look at the

66
00:05:02,860 --> 00:05:13,560
No, we don't have any problem with the way that the briefing papers lay out where we are and where we're headed, that's clear.

67
00:05:14,300 --> 00:05:18,280
That is very clear. We do not. We appreciate the inclusion of this specific

68
00:05:18,280 --> 00:05:22,300
stipulations for our requirements and calling out our specific ordinances. So as

69
00:05:22,300 --> 00:05:26,320
a full of the city is appreciative and supportive of how it's progressing.

70
00:05:27,220 --> 00:05:31,140
And also, thank you very much and we appreciate the city's involvement in our

71
00:05:31,140 --> 00:05:40,000
docket. I know that perhaps Leonard Wabbashah from Shaka P. Midawakitan Sioux was

72
00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:47,480
going to join? Are there any tribal representatives online that wanted to identify themselves

73
00:05:47,480 --> 00:05:50,780
or speak to the docket?

74
00:05:53,080 --> 00:05:54,040
Okay, I don't see anyone.

75
00:05:56,560 --> 00:06:00,220
So Commissioner Sullivan, before you make

76
00:06:00,220 --> 00:06:09,760
a motion commissioner, Tuma has a question. Mr. Mallard, thanks for being on. I was noting

77
00:06:09,760 --> 00:06:16,660
that there is some discussion about insurance and the best project we just had down in Southern

78
00:06:16,660 --> 00:06:22,720
Minnesota, Midwater Bess. We had some insurance language very specific to that permit in our

79
00:06:22,720 --> 00:06:27,860
staff to not include any language here in the draft, but I think it's important that we do have

80
00:06:27,860 --> 00:06:33,460
insurance language in there. So I was just going to poke at you and say, I think that should be

81
00:06:33,460 --> 00:06:38,200
part of the discussion going forward to make sure that you put together some language that

82
00:06:38,700 --> 00:06:44,200
you're comfortable with in the permit. I think we're still trying to level set how

83
00:06:45,600 --> 00:06:50,520
best language and insurance language should be here at the commission. So you're the

84
00:06:50,520 --> 00:06:54,560
second test case is trying to figure out what that looks like is what I would say to you. So

85
00:06:54,560 --> 00:06:59,700
I'm looking at insurance and I'm sure we will have that as part of the discussion and probably

86
00:06:59,700 --> 00:07:04,140
a permit condition. I just wanted to make sure you're comfortable with working on some language

87
00:07:04,140 --> 00:07:09,300
as we go forward around insurance requirements in the permit.

88
00:07:09,660 --> 00:07:13,440
And Mr. Mueller, please identify yourself for the record.

89
00:07:18,290 --> 00:07:18,890
Get your seat.

90
00:07:19,110 --> 00:07:21,810
You've been in good morning, commissioners, David Mueller from Fedor Accent by our

91
00:07:21,810 --> 00:07:27,690
partner on behalf of the applicant, LSP, CGs or storage.

92
00:07:28,630 --> 00:07:35,710
We also have a project representative from paneling capital under clink sick is also online.

93
00:07:36,430 --> 00:07:40,290
But I appreciate the staff briefing papers and I appreciate, you know, we had done a

94
00:07:40,290 --> 00:07:40,510
response.

95
00:07:40,870 --> 00:07:44,990
We, of course, obviously, have insurance for the project and will, but we'd be willing

96
00:07:44,990 --> 00:07:50,530
to work well and add additional language through the process and special condition or whatever

97
00:07:50,530 --> 00:07:51,110
is necessary.

98
00:07:51,490 --> 00:07:55,550
I respond to the time we haven't seen the mid-water written in the order yet, and so that's

99
00:07:55,550 --> 00:08:01,430
why we did the way we responded in our supplemental comments, but we do support the staff

100
00:08:01,430 --> 00:08:05,090
recommendations on three, five and eight, including all the special permit conditions

101
00:08:05,090 --> 00:08:07,770
for the City of Kajgrove.

102
00:08:07,930 --> 00:08:08,270
That was good.

103
00:08:08,270 --> 00:08:09,070
Looking forward to it.

104
00:08:09,070 --> 00:08:10,890
Thank you.

105
00:08:11,290 --> 00:08:12,950
Anything else, commissioners?

106
00:08:13,450 --> 00:08:16,030
Commissioner Sullivan, could you make a motion please?

107
00:08:16,290 --> 00:08:17,190
I'm happy to make a motion.

108
00:08:17,430 --> 00:08:18,050
Thank you.

109
00:08:19,030 --> 00:08:25,470
First of all, I did want to just note that I appreciated the work that the developer has already

110
00:08:25,470 --> 00:08:30,810
done reaching out to the tribal communities and the work that they've done.

111
00:08:30,810 --> 00:08:34,230
and let the city, and I think that they've shown,

112
00:08:34,730 --> 00:08:37,030
like they've put the work in,

113
00:08:37,610 --> 00:08:39,210
at least up to this point,

114
00:08:39,410 --> 00:08:41,010
and I appreciate that, Mr. Moore,

115
00:08:41,030 --> 00:08:44,390
I appreciate your willingness to continue working on those issues

116
00:08:44,390 --> 00:08:44,890
with insurance.

117
00:08:45,010 --> 00:08:47,350
I didn't think at this point, it was necessary to include

118
00:08:47,350 --> 00:08:49,950
some of the stuff, Commissioner Tuma,

119
00:08:50,430 --> 00:08:52,830
so that's why I'm comfortable with decision options,

120
00:08:52,950 --> 00:08:57,550
moving decision options, three, five, and eight,

121
00:08:57,550 --> 00:08:59,910
And I'm happy to answer any questions.

122
00:09:01,870 --> 00:09:04,750
Is there any discussion of Commissioner Sullivan's motion?

123
00:09:05,390 --> 00:09:07,170
All those in favor, please say aye.

124
00:09:08,590 --> 00:09:11,390
I pose the motion prevailed five to zero.

125
00:09:12,010 --> 00:09:12,710
Thank you.

126
00:09:12,850 --> 00:09:13,870
Thank you.

127
00:09:14,510 --> 00:09:16,010
Sitting folks too.

128
00:09:16,630 --> 00:09:17,430
And our staff.

129
00:09:19,430 --> 00:09:23,070
And we'll take up item two when folks get ready next.

130
00:09:46,520 --> 00:09:48,700
Ms. Jackson and Ms. Johnson,

131
00:09:48,700 --> 00:09:50,220
and thank you for your work on this.

132
00:09:50,480 --> 00:09:51,740
Please introduce the item.

133
00:09:55,950 --> 00:09:58,270
Good morning, chair Seaman and commissioners.

134
00:09:58,610 --> 00:09:59,970
Item number two is for Dr.

135
00:10:00,000 --> 00:10:10,840
Number E01-5-CN-25-111. In the matter of the application of Minnesota Power and American Transmission

136
00:10:10,840 --> 00:10:16,800
Company for a certificate of need and route permit for the Iron Range St. Louis County Arrowhead

137
00:10:16,800 --> 00:10:22,880
345 Kilocal Transmission Project. The questions before the commission are, are there any

138
00:10:22,880 --> 00:10:27,540
contested issues of fact with respect to the representations made in the certificate of need

139
00:10:27,540 --> 00:10:36,420
application and are there any other issues or concerns related to this matter? I have no further marks, but I am available for questions. Thank you.

140
00:10:36,600 --> 00:10:44,240
Thank you very much. I think this is pretty clear a procedural decision for the commission to make at this point.

141
00:10:44,240 --> 00:10:51,420
I do have a question for the department if they're available.

142
00:10:53,360 --> 00:10:53,940
Good morning.

143
00:10:54,180 --> 00:10:59,260
Could you please state your name for the record and the organization you're representing?

144
00:10:59,400 --> 00:11:00,320
Yes, my name is Forest.

145
00:11:00,320 --> 00:11:02,540
I'd bow and I'm with the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

146
00:11:03,280 --> 00:11:04,860
Thank you very much for being here.

147
00:11:05,100 --> 00:11:08,220
Are you comfortable with the,

148
00:11:08,220 --> 00:11:13,200
I just wanted to confirm that you are comfortable with the staff recommendation.

149
00:11:13,200 --> 00:11:19,760
foundation that we could handle this certificate of a need application through contested case proceedings.

150
00:11:21,540 --> 00:11:23,360
What decision option number two?

151
00:11:24,240 --> 00:11:25,880
So we absolutely are here.

152
00:11:26,020 --> 00:11:26,220
Okay.

153
00:11:26,800 --> 00:11:26,900
Great.

154
00:11:27,480 --> 00:11:30,140
Are there other questions from commissioners?

155
00:11:30,720 --> 00:11:39,020
Then I would move decision option two to decline to refer their certificate of need application to the court of administrative hearings.

156
00:11:39,020 --> 00:11:47,120
for contested case proceedings under Minnesota statute 1457. Is there any discussion?

157
00:11:48,900 --> 00:11:52,120
Hearing none, all of them favor of my motion, please say aye.

158
00:11:52,640 --> 00:11:57,960
Aye. I opposed the motion prevails. Thank you very much.

159
00:11:58,080 --> 00:12:05,040
Thank you to our staff and next we'll move on to item 3 when folks get ready.

160
00:12:42,740 --> 00:12:47,560
Good morning, Mr. Manning. Please introduce item number three for us.

161
00:12:47,600 --> 00:12:48,680
Good morning, Chair.

162
00:12:48,780 --> 00:12:49,760
See you in commissioners.

163
00:12:49,840 --> 00:12:55,020
Agenda item number three is docket number e999 slash CI 19704.

164
00:12:55,020 --> 00:12:58,600
And the matter of an investigation is into self commitment and self scheduling

165
00:12:58,600 --> 00:13:01,280
of large base load generation facilities.

166
00:13:01,820 --> 00:13:05,760
This docket was last before the commission on October 23, 2025.

167
00:13:06,680 --> 00:13:10,000
The questions for the commission today are have the utilities provided

168
00:13:10,000 --> 00:13:14,100
the data equipment information, the 2025 compiling compliance

169
00:13:14,100 --> 00:13:18,240
filings on self commitment should the utilities be required to provide additional

170
00:13:18,240 --> 00:13:22,260
information or take additional steps regarding self commitment at this time

171
00:13:22,260 --> 00:13:25,640
should the filing of this report be combined with the annual fuel true

172
00:13:25,640 --> 00:13:30,140
of reporting is recommended by joint parties in the December 29, 2025 letter

173
00:13:30,140 --> 00:13:33,660
and should the filing requirements for future years be modified

174
00:13:33,660 --> 00:13:37,960
parties and staff are available for questions. Thank you.

175
00:13:37,960 --> 00:13:46,960
Thank you. Should we have the parties come forward first and stay to appearances,

176
00:13:48,820 --> 00:13:53,800
the utilities that are representing, or the people that are representing the utilities in

177
00:13:53,800 --> 00:14:02,800
the department, if they could come forward? Well, why don't we start with Audertale since it

178
00:14:02,800 --> 00:14:05,380
looks like water tails online.

179
00:14:05,960 --> 00:14:09,020
So whoever's answering questions for water tail,

180
00:14:09,060 --> 00:14:11,700
please identify yourself and the organization

181
00:14:11,700 --> 00:14:12,540
you're representing.

182
00:14:18,020 --> 00:14:21,060
We can't hear you missed on Afriel, I'm not sure why.

183
00:14:37,850 --> 00:14:39,650
Now, yes, now we can.

184
00:14:40,630 --> 00:14:41,090
I apologize.

185
00:14:41,390 --> 00:14:43,650
We did a sound check, but then I got kicked out

186
00:14:43,650 --> 00:14:44,490
and came back again.

187
00:14:44,950 --> 00:14:46,250
And everything was different, apparently.

188
00:14:47,350 --> 00:14:51,490
My name is Lauren Donapriel, and I am the Senior Associate

189
00:14:51,490 --> 00:14:59,690
General Council for our Audertail Power Company and with me to answer questions I have Ryan Vetzlop, who is our manager.

190
00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:07,540
Our marketing and generation operations. And Paula Foster, who is there, our regulatory analyst on this matter.

191
00:15:08,780 --> 00:15:12,640
Okay, thank you. And starting on my right for Minnesota power.

192
00:15:14,790 --> 00:15:18,970
Good morning, Chair C. Ben, commissioners, maprotein and behalf of Minnesota power.

193
00:15:20,930 --> 00:15:27,870
Good morning, Lauren Steinhouser on behalf of Excel Energy. Good morning, Sydney leave with the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

194
00:15:28,450 --> 00:15:29,630
Okay, thank you.

195
00:15:29,630 --> 00:15:34,810
and we'll start with commissioner questions, commissioner, huh?

196
00:15:35,130 --> 00:15:42,450
Thank you. Thank you, Chair Sivan. I do not have a question, but I think step raise this

197
00:15:42,450 --> 00:15:48,910
question, and then I think I agree with it. The main reason we are discussing this today is because

198
00:15:48,910 --> 00:15:54,590
we are trying to change the venue of discussing this issue from the CCI data to the triple A

199
00:15:54,590 --> 00:15:58,910
markets. I agree with it because this

200
00:15:58,910 --> 00:16:01,350
market is mature. I think it has a

201
00:16:01,350 --> 00:16:03,550
significant impact to the optimal

202
00:16:03,550 --> 00:16:06,290
dispatch of our coal plants. I think

203
00:16:06,290 --> 00:16:08,370
that save a lot of money for our

204
00:16:08,370 --> 00:16:11,450
way pairs. Now it's I think given

205
00:16:11,450 --> 00:16:13,350
this maturity and the apartments are

206
00:16:13,350 --> 00:16:15,010
green ones, we can move these to the

207
00:16:15,010 --> 00:16:17,190
cheap late markets. When there is an

208
00:16:17,190 --> 00:16:18,990
annual true up, we can discuss this

209
00:16:18,990 --> 00:16:21,170
issue as a part of those overall

210
00:16:22,610 --> 00:16:23,790
discussion.

211
00:16:25,650 --> 00:16:28,590
Are there other questions for the utilities?

212
00:16:31,480 --> 00:16:35,580
Ms. Donafrio, as I know that for

213
00:16:35,580 --> 00:16:40,760
Audertail AME is taking effect or is now taken effect.

214
00:16:41,340 --> 00:16:46,620
And this is this docket doesn't cover AME as an operational

215
00:16:47,820 --> 00:16:57,160
economic output for your coal facilities, but in anticipation of AME, I don't know how

216
00:16:57,160 --> 00:17:03,720
else to say it, like happening now in 2026, what do you think or is it too hard to

217
00:17:03,720 --> 00:17:08,980
speculate? Is there anything that you're seeing that you want the commission to be aware of

218
00:17:08,980 --> 00:17:14,140
as it relates to AME that you see coming.

219
00:17:16,820 --> 00:17:20,220
Certainly, and I will point that question

220
00:17:20,220 --> 00:17:22,880
to Ryan Rett's law chair Stevens,

221
00:17:23,160 --> 00:17:26,900
as I think he has a better grasp on the day-to-day

222
00:17:26,900 --> 00:17:28,020
of how that's working.

223
00:17:29,820 --> 00:17:32,520
Mr. Rett's law, just state your name quickly, please.

224
00:17:32,940 --> 00:17:33,400
Thank you.

225
00:17:34,540 --> 00:17:35,540
Thank you, chair Stevens.

226
00:17:35,800 --> 00:17:37,380
Ryan Rett's law for the latter two of power.

227
00:17:37,380 --> 00:17:40,860
I am the manager of wholesale marketing here.

228
00:17:42,700 --> 00:17:45,180
Yeah, in regards to Amy, thank you for the question.

229
00:17:46,240 --> 00:17:51,080
The thing that I would note for us, especially with regard to the self-committ filing,

230
00:17:51,960 --> 00:17:55,440
is we'll have to figure out how we're going to report that next year.

231
00:17:56,180 --> 00:18:02,640
You know, partial year will have Amy in it and partial of the year will not have Amy in it.

232
00:18:02,640 --> 00:18:13,680
And, you know, what we want to look at when that split happens and it'll change the reporting a little that didn't want to maybe have some discussions around that.

233
00:18:14,460 --> 00:18:23,240
So far, since June 1st, County Amie has run very little, I think through July was maybe like seven hours.

234
00:18:23,780 --> 00:18:30,780
I think it's something like that. I'm not sure whether it precise number is, but it has not been much.

235
00:18:32,880 --> 00:18:40,380
And the other thing I would just notice is just, or mention is, you know, there are times

236
00:18:40,380 --> 00:18:45,000
when we will see some megawatt hours fall into coyote and me when we do some necessary

237
00:18:45,000 --> 00:18:45,680
testing.

238
00:18:46,260 --> 00:18:50,060
I'm not sure if that's been discussed in too much detail.

239
00:18:51,460 --> 00:18:57,620
But we will see some generated generation megawatts allocated there, but they should be very

240
00:18:57,620 --> 00:18:58,600
limited as well.

241
00:18:58,600 --> 00:19:03,440
So, and do you think that we have any evidence or any other questions?

242
00:19:03,920 --> 00:19:08,840
No, I appreciate that and I did, like, as you were answering it,

243
00:19:08,980 --> 00:19:14,900
made me, your point about how it could affect the reporting because of the,

244
00:19:14,900 --> 00:19:17,200
because of the changes that are occurring.

245
00:19:17,340 --> 00:19:26,600
Is there anything that you think we should ask you to do in addition for reporting into the,

246
00:19:26,600 --> 00:19:35,960
fuel-clogs docket now that will be that might just be helpful or that I assume you file

247
00:19:35,960 --> 00:19:40,540
information if we asked for it anyway, whether we ordered it or not, but anything because

248
00:19:40,540 --> 00:19:43,840
of that change that you think is helpful to include in the reports.

249
00:19:45,620 --> 00:19:49,560
You know, Commissioner, chair Seben, thank you.

250
00:19:50,100 --> 00:19:55,680
I would, I'm maybe not be the very best person to answer to that question, but I will say that

251
00:19:55,680 --> 00:19:59,960
we have set up a new asset owner within my soda capture most of those

252
00:20:05,620 --> 00:20:14,000
I'm expecting that all of our dollars in costs will get, and credits will get allocated correctly.

253
00:20:17,170 --> 00:20:20,210
So, I can't think of anything at this time.

254
00:20:20,790 --> 00:20:24,830
I was more concerned about, you know, once we go

255
00:20:24,830 --> 00:20:27,650
from having reporting CODE as one entity,

256
00:20:28,570 --> 00:20:31,110
and then we get to June 1st of 2026,

257
00:20:31,710 --> 00:20:33,910
and we're now splitting it between CODE and me

258
00:20:33,910 --> 00:20:36,490
and the code is shared of CODE.

259
00:20:37,270 --> 00:20:40,590
You know, how will we want that reported

260
00:20:40,590 --> 00:20:42,770
for the self-commentment process?

261
00:20:44,390 --> 00:20:50,990
I'm not the person to ask. Dr. Leave, do you have any thoughts on this or further, I assume you

262
00:20:50,990 --> 00:20:56,370
can ask questions as this continues to unfold if you need more information?

263
00:20:58,880 --> 00:21:02,740
Sure, Steven. I don't know that we've thought this through completely at this point. I think

264
00:21:02,740 --> 00:21:09,480
we would bring it up as the filings are coming forward, but I'll ask Dr. Raccoe if he hasn't

265
00:21:09,480 --> 00:21:11,680
Anything else to add there?

266
00:21:11,940 --> 00:21:12,500
No.

267
00:21:13,020 --> 00:21:13,420
He's shaking.

268
00:21:13,580 --> 00:21:14,080
He said no.

269
00:21:14,200 --> 00:21:15,060
He says no.

270
00:21:15,940 --> 00:21:16,140
Okay.

271
00:21:16,140 --> 00:21:16,320
Surprise.

272
00:21:17,220 --> 00:21:17,240
Yes.

273
00:21:18,400 --> 00:21:22,420
Well, we can always add if there's not sufficient information.

274
00:21:22,700 --> 00:21:28,400
We can always continue to handle that in the docket and.

275
00:21:28,560 --> 00:21:29,140
And sure.

276
00:21:29,400 --> 00:21:35,680
We would be more than happy to visit with how how that reporting format should be changed.

277
00:21:35,680 --> 00:21:40,440
and so we two different units, as we closer to that time period.

278
00:21:40,640 --> 00:21:47,580
And you're willing to work, of course, with our staff and the department as they want on that.

279
00:21:48,540 --> 00:21:48,940
Yeah, great.

280
00:21:50,420 --> 00:21:53,540
Any other questions from commissioners?

281
00:21:53,660 --> 00:21:56,220
And Commissioner Ham, do you want to make a motion?

282
00:22:05,660 --> 00:22:05,960
them.

283
00:22:09,090 --> 00:22:14,010
Is there any discussion of Commissioner Homs motion? All in favor please say aye.

284
00:22:14,630 --> 00:22:18,810
Aye. Opposed. The motion prevails. Thank you very much everyone.

285
00:22:20,970 --> 00:22:21,650
Thank you.

286
00:23:02,160 --> 00:23:07,420
Christian noises are analysts for agenda item four. Please introduce the item.

287
00:23:07,820 --> 00:23:11,360
Yes. Good morning, Chair Steven and Commissioner. As item number four is

288
00:23:11,360 --> 00:23:22,620
Docket number E002 comma PT 7157 slash SA-25-129

289
00:23:24,960 --> 00:23:27,660
involving Excel energy and the city of

290
00:23:27,660 --> 00:23:32,460
Slayton in the matter of the petition of the city of Slayton for determination of compensation

291
00:23:32,460 --> 00:23:36,780
for a city acquisition of Excel energy electric service territory.

292
00:23:38,320 --> 00:23:42,900
The question before the commission is should the commission accept, reject, or modify,

293
00:23:42,900 --> 00:23:48,900
the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations provided by the Court of Administrative

294
00:23:48,900 --> 00:23:55,000
hearings. We had a late filed letter of decision options by the City of Slayton,

295
00:23:55,340 --> 00:24:01,240
which staff compiled with the original decision options. We also have new decision options

296
00:24:01,240 --> 00:24:06,740
submitted by Commissioner Partridge, both sets of decision options are available in the back corner

297
00:24:06,740 --> 00:24:09,460
and are set at the commissioner stations.

298
00:24:11,360 --> 00:24:13,540
We have representatives from Excel energy,

299
00:24:14,180 --> 00:24:18,140
the City of Slayton and the Department of Commerce available for commissioner questions.

300
00:24:19,180 --> 00:24:22,760
I have no further remarks but also available for questions. Thank you.

301
00:24:25,400 --> 00:24:27,300
It's the parties could please come forward.

302
00:24:27,500 --> 00:24:32,280
We'll begin with opening statements from the parties.

303
00:24:43,570 --> 00:24:47,450
For three parties we have a lot of people who want to,

304
00:24:47,450 --> 00:24:59,870
and not enough chairs. So if you are not speaking right at the beginning, you're welcome to still sit at that second row of chairs if and then we can call you up if.

305
00:25:00,880 --> 00:25:07,660
If you want to address the commission or the commission asks you a question, but

306
00:25:21,960 --> 00:25:40,600
so because we had some late filed comments and decision options, I thought it would be a good idea to just have parties begin with outlining to us where your final positions are and what decision options or action you'd like the commission to take.

307
00:25:40,600 --> 00:25:49,840
And we'll begin this morning, how about with the Department of Commerce, who's on my far left,

308
00:25:49,960 --> 00:25:55,400
if you could please introduce yourself and state anything you'd like.

309
00:25:55,540 --> 00:25:56,280
I'd appreciate it.

310
00:25:57,180 --> 00:25:58,760
Good morning, commissioners.

311
00:25:59,220 --> 00:26:00,920
I'm at Hondo Assistant Attorney General.

312
00:26:01,300 --> 00:26:01,680
It's not on.

313
00:26:05,340 --> 00:26:06,880
The camera went to you.

314
00:26:07,040 --> 00:26:09,060
So I think I think.

315
00:26:09,500 --> 00:26:09,640
Good.

316
00:26:13,460 --> 00:26:19,820
of commerce today. The Department continues to support its contributions to the record in this matter

317
00:26:19,820 --> 00:26:24,660
and the Department supports decision option one, accepting the ALJ report and its entirety.

318
00:26:25,800 --> 00:26:30,200
While all of the final costs have not been finalized yet based on the information currently in the

319
00:26:30,200 --> 00:26:41,660
record, estimated compensation per accepting the ALJ report consists of a lump sum payment of a

320
00:26:41,660 --> 00:26:49,580
1,616.79 mills per kilowatt hour over a period of 10 years for loss revenue.

321
00:26:50,280 --> 00:26:57,320
Additionally, based on August 2026, Status of the ER Interconnection Q at the late-in-West

322
00:26:57,320 --> 00:27:04,280
Substation, there aren't active studies at this time, therefore, partridge new 10A decision

323
00:27:04,280 --> 00:27:05,860
option may be unnecessary.

324
00:27:07,700 --> 00:27:08,800
Thank you.

325
00:27:09,680 --> 00:27:16,300
Thank you. Next we'll hear from the City of Slayton and please state your name for the

326
00:27:16,300 --> 00:27:18,820
record and then provide comments.

327
00:27:21,520 --> 00:27:21,960
Mr.

328
00:27:25,040 --> 00:27:27,260
Weir, I'm sorry, but I should have told you

329
00:27:27,260 --> 00:27:31,180
there's a button at the bottom there. Oh, thank you. There we go. So the folks online can

330
00:27:31,180 --> 00:27:34,500
hear. Can you just repeat that? It's certainly a good morning, Trustee Ben. Commissioner

331
00:27:34,500 --> 00:27:37,780
is my name is Josh Weer on behalf of the City of Slayton.

332
00:27:39,380 --> 00:27:43,980
And the City of Slayton respectfully asked the Commission to adopt the city's decision options

333
00:27:43,980 --> 00:27:47,720
all to four, new six, and new eight.

334
00:27:48,860 --> 00:27:51,160
The central issue in this case is loss of revenue.

335
00:27:51,760 --> 00:27:54,680
The city in Excel take very different positions on this.

336
00:27:54,860 --> 00:28:01,080
The city's expert, David Berg, evaluated Excel's actual, unrecoverable losses during

337
00:28:01,080 --> 00:28:05,480
a reasonable adjustment period needed to bring any losses down to zero.

338
00:28:05,900 --> 00:28:10,360
As a approach has grounded in principles of cost avoidance, in mitigation, in consistent

339
00:28:10,360 --> 00:28:11,620
with commission president.

340
00:28:12,380 --> 00:28:16,880
Buying these principles to the city established a full record of evidence showing that

341
00:28:16,880 --> 00:28:22,700
Slayton represents less than one tenth of one percent of Excel's Minnesota load, and that

342
00:28:22,700 --> 00:28:28,640
Excel can and most certainly will redeploy resources from Slayton to serve other customers.

343
00:28:28,640 --> 00:28:33,840
The four megawatts of capacity now serve in Slayton and will not sit idle, their capacity

344
00:28:33,840 --> 00:28:38,840
that Excel can use elsewhere, delaying new construction and avoiding costs that would otherwise

345
00:28:38,840 --> 00:28:40,520
put upward pressure on rates.

346
00:28:41,560 --> 00:28:43,280
Excel's model takes the opposite approach.

347
00:28:43,460 --> 00:28:49,900
It relies on overly optimistic statewide projections and assumptions and would let Excel continue

348
00:28:49,900 --> 00:28:54,000
collecting 70% of Slayton revenues while providing no service.

349
00:28:54,000 --> 00:28:59,000
While it uses those resources to serve other customers, and it's growing load-based,

350
00:28:59,820 --> 00:29:03,500
the ALJ's recommendations did not address the city's evidence on these key points.

351
00:29:03,980 --> 00:29:09,420
For example, city witness Mark Fretch offered un-rebuted testimony of his first-hand knowledge

352
00:29:09,420 --> 00:29:14,740
and experience as an employee of Excel, and its ability to adjust and reallocate resources

353
00:29:14,740 --> 00:29:20,240
after a loss in load within a five-year period, and potentially within even the first year.

354
00:29:20,240 --> 00:29:27,460
The recommendation also found only $254 a year in avoidable distribution costs, and amount

355
00:29:27,460 --> 00:29:33,580
insufficient to cover depreciation on even a handful of transformers, let alone the $3 million

356
00:29:33,580 --> 00:29:36,800
distribution system the city would be purchased in.

357
00:29:36,820 --> 00:29:41,940
In most concern, the recommendation did not even discuss Mr. Fritch's testimony, the distribution

358
00:29:41,940 --> 00:29:47,060
cost avoidance issues that the city pointed out, or the cost savings from redeploying

359
00:29:47,060 --> 00:29:49,620
sources instead of building new ones.

360
00:29:50,540 --> 00:29:54,340
Touching briefly on the site in West Substation, the record shows that Slayton's historical

361
00:29:54,340 --> 00:29:59,980
load on it uses only 28.6% of the substations overall.

362
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:11,680
Local capacity, and that the sub-station remains important for Excel's interconnection needs. Mr. Bergs Treatment of the sub-station is part of the loss of revenue consideration, fairly compensates Excel for this issue.

363
00:30:12,660 --> 00:30:24,880
Lastly, on integration costs, the commission should award proven costs, not possibilities, speculative engineering studies, hypothetical DER impacts, and undefined future expenses should not be awarded.

364
00:30:25,460 --> 00:30:29,160
Excel is not shown what these costs are, or that they are reasonable and prudent.

365
00:30:30,080 --> 00:30:34,440
At bottom, this case asks whether compensation will reflect actual on recoverable losses,

366
00:30:35,360 --> 00:30:39,340
or hypothetical future revenues. The record supports only one answer,

367
00:30:39,600 --> 00:30:41,820
and the commission should adopt the city's approach.

368
00:30:43,460 --> 00:30:46,900
With that, I would ask permission, Mr. Malchow, the City of Meshare,

369
00:30:46,960 --> 00:30:50,360
also it's a brief remarks prepared if the commission would like to hear them now,

370
00:30:50,600 --> 00:30:53,300
or we could wait until you get into the commission's questions.

371
00:30:53,300 --> 00:30:54,680
Thank you.

372
00:30:54,960 --> 00:30:58,660
Why don't we hold off and then we'll hear him when we get into questions.

373
00:31:00,160 --> 00:31:02,160
So, next Excel, please.

374
00:31:03,620 --> 00:31:04,100
Thank you, Chair.

375
00:31:04,680 --> 00:31:09,040
My name is Ryan Barlow from the law firm of Cozen, O'Connor, appearing on behalf of Excel energy.

376
00:31:09,360 --> 00:31:11,540
Also with me today is Ian Dodson from Excel.

377
00:31:12,120 --> 00:31:16,640
And we have some other folks available if there are technical questions that you need answers to.

378
00:31:17,420 --> 00:31:21,040
I want to first clarify what the company's role is in this case.

379
00:31:21,040 --> 00:31:28,220
If Slayton leaves our system, the company will lose around $3 million of revenue each year.

380
00:31:28,980 --> 00:31:34,280
Unless that can be offset with avoided costs, or with just compensation from Slayton,

381
00:31:35,020 --> 00:31:37,140
that will lead to a rate increase for our other customers.

382
00:31:38,120 --> 00:31:43,200
And our primary goal in this case is to protect our other customers from that rate increase,

383
00:31:43,320 --> 00:31:45,300
which would be caused by Slayton's choice to leave.

384
00:31:46,200 --> 00:31:55,360
To that end, we have committed that any just compensation we receive from Slayton will be refunded to our other customers to protect them from that rate impact.

385
00:31:56,840 --> 00:32:00,820
We generally agree with the conclusions and recommendations in the ALJ report.

386
00:32:01,680 --> 00:32:05,800
We disagree on a few technical areas, including the time period and growth rates,

387
00:32:06,580 --> 00:32:09,680
but there are two other things I want to call attention to in particular.

388
00:32:09,680 --> 00:32:16,320
The first is related to engineering studies. We are supportive of the direction of new decision

389
00:32:16,320 --> 00:32:22,200
option 10A, filed by Commissioner Partridge. We're happy to provide a compliance filing after any

390
00:32:22,200 --> 00:32:28,680
studies are complete. We would propose a change to the scope. While there are some solar interconnection

391
00:32:28,680 --> 00:32:34,120
issues, our concern about engineering studies is broader and I'm happy to discuss this in more detail,

392
00:32:34,540 --> 00:32:39,380
but I know you only want two minutes here. So we would propose to expand that so that it covers

393
00:32:39,380 --> 00:32:43,680
any engineering studies that we are required to do because of the

394
00:32:43,680 --> 00:32:47,540
exit of slate and from our system and I have some language that I can provide at the

395
00:32:47,540 --> 00:32:53,200
right time. Second, we're aligned with the ALJ's overall recommendation on the

396
00:32:53,200 --> 00:32:58,660
treatment of the slate and west substation, but the ALJ also recommended that we

397
00:32:58,660 --> 00:33:04,820
be required to provide some additional information after this hearing. We think that

398
00:33:04,820 --> 00:33:08,220
we've already provided all of that information. I'm not going to walk through it here,

399
00:33:08,220 --> 00:33:10,860
that we listed it on page 13 of our exceptions.

400
00:33:11,900 --> 00:33:14,600
So our request is just that we not be required

401
00:33:14,600 --> 00:33:17,860
to make that extra filing, and I have language

402
00:33:17,860 --> 00:33:20,320
for that to share at the right time.

403
00:33:20,560 --> 00:33:23,260
If the commission does want us to provide more information

404
00:33:23,260 --> 00:33:25,920
about that substation, we would ask for some guidance

405
00:33:25,920 --> 00:33:27,640
on what you're looking for.

406
00:33:27,800 --> 00:33:29,820
For my perspective, we think we've put everything

407
00:33:29,820 --> 00:33:32,060
into the record to do that calculation already,

408
00:33:32,220 --> 00:33:34,940
and we're not sure what else there would be that's needed.

409
00:33:34,940 --> 00:33:40,160
And finally, staff reached out to ask that we have cost calculations available.

410
00:33:41,400 --> 00:33:46,560
I've got that if you need it, I confirm that our current recommendation is what we put

411
00:33:46,560 --> 00:33:47,300
in our exceptions.

412
00:33:47,400 --> 00:33:50,280
It's a lump sum payment of approximately $35 million.

413
00:33:51,160 --> 00:33:56,440
I know that the ALJ recommended splitting that into mill rates, and we can provide that calculation.

414
00:33:56,980 --> 00:34:00,260
We also have the calculations for the different time periods that are in the briefing

415
00:34:00,260 --> 00:34:01,860
papers and decision options.

416
00:34:05,150 --> 00:34:05,530
Thank you.

417
00:34:05,530 --> 00:34:12,730
Okay, we'll begin with Commissioner questions, who would like to begin, Commissioner Sullivan?

418
00:34:15,010 --> 00:34:22,330
Commissioner Parcher wants to go first, I can, but I just have a couple kind of high-level questions.

419
00:34:23,270 --> 00:34:33,710
In general, I mean, I reviewed the record and I found that ALJ's recommendation kind of revolving around where I was at.

420
00:34:33,710 --> 00:34:42,250
You know, I think that the blending of generation, planning, and distribution planning

421
00:34:42,250 --> 00:34:47,690
in 10 years. I mean, I was kind of more like an 15-year frame, but 10 years I'm okay with,

422
00:34:48,310 --> 00:34:52,850
but so I'm kind of in that spot and I've been looking forward to the conversation here to really

423
00:34:52,850 --> 00:34:58,330
kind of titrate in where exactly I'm at. But there's a couple of things that I was wondering about

424
00:34:58,330 --> 00:34:59,930
from the city of Slayton's perspective.

425
00:35:00,000 --> 00:35:27,400
And I appreciate that this all started because of poor service, that at least some incidents of poor service, I think objectively the numbers are kind of some years you're up a, you know, a little bit worse, some years you're a little bit better and you kind of, kind of, but there are some really bad examples out there, like in particular, you know, when the fire department had to come out for four hours and water the ground.

426
00:35:27,400 --> 00:35:35,980
I mean, I think that's unacceptable and I completely appreciate your exasperation with that situation.

427
00:35:39,480 --> 00:35:45,380
And service in the South has been an issue that this incident has been an issue that this commission has been focused on.

428
00:35:45,740 --> 00:35:47,800
So it's not great to hear that.

429
00:35:49,760 --> 00:35:54,660
But there are a couple things that I am worried about in their higher level.

430
00:35:56,100 --> 00:36:03,120
One of them is, what is the, and these are, I'm interested in what the, the community

431
00:36:03,120 --> 00:36:10,640
is thinking long term, but, would you be, in creating slight municipal utilities, would

432
00:36:10,640 --> 00:36:16,280
that be a forever entity or would you be coming back to the commission at some point in

433
00:36:16,280 --> 00:36:20,500
the future and looking to do basically a service territory swap, where you're going to just

434
00:36:20,500 --> 00:36:24,280
and it all over to Noel's County in the electorate.

435
00:36:25,820 --> 00:36:27,200
I chair Stephen Commissioner Sullivan,

436
00:36:27,300 --> 00:36:28,200
I appreciate the question.

437
00:36:28,640 --> 00:36:31,200
So I just need to state your name for the record, too.

438
00:36:31,260 --> 00:36:33,940
Josh Malchow City Administrator for the City of Slayton, Minnesota.

439
00:36:35,360 --> 00:36:37,560
Appreciate being here today, appreciate the question.

440
00:36:38,040 --> 00:36:40,540
100% this is a forever thing for us.

441
00:36:40,940 --> 00:36:44,360
We are not looking at doing what I would phrase

442
00:36:44,360 --> 00:36:46,400
as a bait and switch to the community,

443
00:36:46,560 --> 00:36:49,580
where we sold it to them on a bond issue referendum

444
00:36:49,580 --> 00:36:56,520
and statutory referendum question, and then all of a sudden turn around and do that again.

445
00:36:57,080 --> 00:37:00,060
Um, to try to make a quick buck, we, your 100% correct.

446
00:37:00,280 --> 00:37:05,900
We got into this not because we're looking for a cash cow revenue stream.

447
00:37:06,040 --> 00:37:10,540
We got into it because we think that we can do it better and more responsive to the community.

448
00:37:11,460 --> 00:37:11,480
Mm-hmm.

449
00:37:11,480 --> 00:37:16,720
I mean, under state law, that is the right of the community to do, so I appreciate that.

450
00:37:16,720 --> 00:37:27,720
Another question that I had is, I have, so, I mean, how long would nobody's county electric,

451
00:37:28,500 --> 00:37:30,920
do you have, you'll have a contract with them for services?

452
00:37:31,240 --> 00:37:35,820
Are you, can you say how long that contract would be, or, I mean, if you're like, no, I don't

453
00:37:35,820 --> 00:37:37,180
know that's fine too.

454
00:37:37,740 --> 00:37:38,640
Nothing signed yet.

455
00:37:38,680 --> 00:37:42,800
I think as part of the record, actually, in terms of Excel's testimony, they did a data

456
00:37:42,800 --> 00:37:46,300
request and got some emails which is completely fine.

457
00:37:47,200 --> 00:37:52,860
The draft not approved by either their board or our board is 10 years at this current time.

458
00:37:53,080 --> 00:37:53,120
Okay.

459
00:37:54,180 --> 00:37:59,880
And then just be for O&M, power purchase, we don't have anything, we can do whatever we want there of course.

460
00:38:00,040 --> 00:38:02,040
I would just be for operations and maintenance and billing.

461
00:38:03,700 --> 00:38:06,460
And then so, okay, I got it.

462
00:38:07,940 --> 00:38:12,220
And then another question I had is in regards to community solar gardens.

463
00:38:12,220 --> 00:38:19,740
And, I mean, there are, I recognize that there are costs that the company is incurred

464
00:38:19,740 --> 00:38:25,120
because of the CSG program, and I think that those are costs that, you know, they

465
00:38:25,120 --> 00:38:31,880
should be rightly compensated for, but I'm wondering if that community has, and I, when reading

466
00:38:31,880 --> 00:38:39,640
the record, I was struck that there was a one-sixth of the residents of Slayton or on

467
00:38:39,640 --> 00:38:46,620
is she is that right that was the number that's in the record that I saw that is in the record I

468
00:38:46,620 --> 00:38:50,140
don't have the information in front of me hasn't aside I think it'd be kind of interesting to see

469
00:38:50,140 --> 00:38:57,380
what percentage of them voted to get rid of the company but um I do think it has the I don't know

470
00:38:58,100 --> 00:39:02,700
in the list commission I don't think is a lot of jurisdiction but I hope that the city is thinking

471
00:39:02,700 --> 00:39:09,920
through like how are those those people are going to have a fundamentally different arrangement with

472
00:39:09,920 --> 00:39:18,580
blatant and nobles than they will with Excel, and I would think that I don't know what

473
00:39:18,580 --> 00:39:25,160
you're thinking about regarding a very significant portion of the population that's on

474
00:39:25,160 --> 00:39:31,560
CSG programs, you know that that value of solar rate, I don't know exactly what it depends

475
00:39:31,560 --> 00:39:37,980
out to right now, but it's probably somewhere in the neighborhood of $120 or maybe what

476
00:39:37,980 --> 00:39:46,120
or, you know, it's a lot less than nobles that nobles and the city are going to have to

477
00:39:46,120 --> 00:39:52,180
fulfill if those people are going to be kind of made whole. So I'm just kind of curious what you're

478
00:39:52,180 --> 00:39:55,580
thinking about with that or if you're like, well that's a tomorrow problem.

479
00:39:57,660 --> 00:39:58,720
It's a little bit of both.

480
00:40:00,000 --> 00:40:07,920
So we do recognize that we want to offer the same type of programming that people are able to do now.

481
00:40:08,160 --> 00:40:14,660
An issue that we see is number one, we stand by our testimony that we don't believe it's an open checkbook.

482
00:40:14,820 --> 00:40:22,160
So to speak for these ongoing costs to the company as appropriate, but to the ratepayers themselves, that's a different story.

483
00:40:22,160 --> 00:40:33,280
And I'll speak to that. There's many, many, many different solar developers that have signed up for people in our community for community solar.

484
00:40:33,480 --> 00:40:50,660
Whether it's 10 years, 15 years or 20 years, and so when you asked how many people are in it, and it generally how much they're getting for a credit, that's really difficult to answer, because it's, it's so many different developers that have signed people up.

485
00:40:50,660 --> 00:40:52,680
of by way of the community.

486
00:40:52,700 --> 00:40:56,700
The CSG would all be via solar, I think, so like that would all be.

487
00:40:57,220 --> 00:41:04,400
But what we have in town is people that are flashing the Excel card, so to speak, and they're

488
00:41:04,400 --> 00:41:11,840
a third party, and those third parties, fundamentally they have to all satisfy states at you

489
00:41:11,840 --> 00:41:20,000
as community solar gardens are currently set up, but how that third party takes it is anybody's

490
00:41:20,000 --> 00:41:27,100
So there isn't a set of contractual terms for every single customer, I guess, is what I'm saying.

491
00:41:29,020 --> 00:41:31,740
Well, I appreciate you answering these questions.

492
00:41:32,080 --> 00:41:37,060
These are just things that are not going around in the back of this dude's head right now.

493
00:41:37,480 --> 00:41:39,980
I mean, they're not just things that are looking.

494
00:41:41,420 --> 00:41:44,600
I am concerned about, and I appreciate you mentioned,

495
00:41:44,600 --> 00:41:51,820
was kind of concerned about the bait and switch, not that we have a lot of authority, you

496
00:41:51,820 --> 00:42:00,180
know, you know, I just, we have to, as a, the entity that protects utility service

497
00:42:00,180 --> 00:42:06,620
territories, I think we just have to be on alert for that. We also protect municipal service

498
00:42:06,620 --> 00:42:12,680
territories, so it's just something I was concerned about and also just wanted to hear more

499
00:42:12,680 --> 00:42:16,320
from your perspective about, you know, how you're thinking about some of these other practical,

500
00:42:16,760 --> 00:42:21,300
what I think of problems, so that's all I have.

501
00:42:21,980 --> 00:42:22,760
Chris, are you sure, Tuma?

502
00:42:24,480 --> 00:42:31,140
You know, I can defer again to Mr. Partridge. I wanted to dive into what Excel thinks about

503
00:42:31,140 --> 00:42:37,200
your 15, but I didn't want to steal any of your Thunder. I've had done some reading on it

504
00:42:37,860 --> 00:42:43,140
from the legal standpoint, but you know, comfortable with holding off too, so.

505
00:42:45,070 --> 00:42:49,910
Would it be okay if I just provided some overview of kind of what I put together?

506
00:42:52,050 --> 00:42:57,930
So first of all, to the city of Slayton, echoing what Commissioner Sullivan said to you,

507
00:42:58,510 --> 00:43:03,410
I am very empathetic to the service quality issues that you had.

508
00:43:03,410 --> 00:43:06,550
And I,

509
00:43:09,430 --> 00:43:14,970
personally, would have liked to have an opportunity, you know, through a complaint

510
00:43:14,970 --> 00:43:18,670
process to help improve those.

511
00:43:20,750 --> 00:43:26,550
So anyway, I just want to say, you know, I think that the service quality issues that you

512
00:43:26,550 --> 00:43:30,450
faced were unacceptable to me, and I think to this whole commission.

513
00:43:30,450 --> 00:43:41,990
So, I want to start with that, however, it's really important for us to make sure that we are protecting existing rate pairs from any kind of cost shift.

514
00:43:42,890 --> 00:43:54,590
And as we know distribution system and the electric system overall is extremely expensive, and that is why we have to socialize it over large groups of people and customers.

515
00:43:54,590 --> 00:44:02,870
And so when we take a small piece off of it, it is very expensive, even the small piece can become very expensive.

516
00:44:05,190 --> 00:44:24,570
So, in reading the ALJ's report, I think it was clear that what she was trying to do is to balance these long-term assets and long-term planning with the realization that the company can shift and has some flexibility in the midterm to make changes for how they allocate those resources.

517
00:44:25,430 --> 00:44:32,590
will also ensuring that their recovering loss revenues in order to keep existing rate payers

518
00:44:32,590 --> 00:44:38,790
whole. And so I want to start with that that you know I would like to be able to say to the

519
00:44:38,790 --> 00:44:43,890
city of Slayton you know here's a good deal for you but in doing that we would be potentially

520
00:44:43,890 --> 00:44:49,330
shifting costs on to existing rate payers. And so it's just a very challenging as you know

521
00:44:49,330 --> 00:44:55,330
position for the Commission to be in, we are sympathetic to your concerns and your experience

522
00:44:55,330 --> 00:44:59,810
and also really want to be protective of existing ratepayers.

523
00:45:00,340 --> 00:45:20,280
I think the decision option 10, aye, that I put in was an opportunity to both recognize that there isn't good data within the record to say whether there will be engineering studies, whether there will be additional costs and what those would be.

524
00:45:20,720 --> 00:45:29,720
And so my goal here was to say we aren't saying that those would automatically be considered just compensation and be rolled into that amount.

525
00:45:29,720 --> 00:45:44,680
But to say that, we would want to see what those costs are and that the company would have to prove that those were unavoidable, that they were caused by the transfer to the city of Slayton and that they were prudently incurred.

526
00:45:44,940 --> 00:45:51,260
And then if we saw those, we would have the Department of Commerce, I'm sure would review those very closely.

527
00:45:52,720 --> 00:45:57,980
We and our staff would review those closely and you would have an opportunity to review those and respond to them.

528
00:45:57,980 --> 00:46:13,600
So it was to recognize that there may be costs, they were not quantified in the record and we would do our due diligence to make sure that those were unavoidable associated with the transfer and prudent.

529
00:46:17,140 --> 00:46:19,820
So that's kind of where that came from.

530
00:46:19,820 --> 00:46:26,960
I am interested in hearing from the company what additional costs I did see I want to note that there was

531
00:46:26,960 --> 00:46:33,500
conversation in the record around disputes and I think Commissioner Sullivan brought this up.

532
00:46:33,520 --> 00:46:40,280
You have a significant number of residents who are subscribers to community solar gardens.

533
00:46:40,860 --> 00:46:47,020
They will, as I understand, lose those subscriptions. As you mentioned, those contracts between the

534
00:46:47,020 --> 00:46:55,720
President and the community solar garden owner are different, the terms, the expenses, those

535
00:46:55,720 --> 00:47:02,120
residents may incur when they have to exit those contracts, that's not something that

536
00:47:02,120 --> 00:47:11,680
we oversee, it's not something that you oversee, it is very likely to be phone calls that

537
00:47:11,680 --> 00:47:18,900
Excel, the company receives, there may be legal action between residents and the community

538
00:47:18,900 --> 00:47:26,100
solar garden owners, you know, I hopefully that won't implicate the company, but I would

539
00:47:26,100 --> 00:47:33,860
be surprised if it did not. And so I did see that you had also mentioned those types of costs

540
00:47:33,860 --> 00:47:40,760
of dealing with those complaints and resolutions to those. Where can you expand upon what you

541
00:47:40,760 --> 00:47:43,320
or thinking in terms of additional engineering studies.

542
00:47:43,880 --> 00:47:45,280
Thank you Chair Commissioner Partridge.

543
00:47:46,120 --> 00:47:51,060
First, yes, we have raised the possibility for costs like that to help customers who

544
00:47:51,060 --> 00:47:52,560
are becoming not our customers.

545
00:47:53,320 --> 00:47:58,700
We would like those included if they arise, particularly if there are legal issues that

546
00:47:58,700 --> 00:48:02,020
we get entangled in, that will cause costs for our customers.

547
00:48:02,440 --> 00:48:04,420
That's not the focus of what I mentioned earlier.

548
00:48:05,320 --> 00:48:10,260
While we have mentioned the possibility for engineering studies relating to solar gardens

549
00:48:10,260 --> 00:48:15,780
that are in the queue, our actual greatest concern about engineering studies is just related

550
00:48:15,780 --> 00:48:18,240
to the loss of slate and load from our system.

551
00:48:19,120 --> 00:48:24,580
The substation near slate and called slate and west serves almost entirely and only

552
00:48:24,580 --> 00:48:26,060
the city of Slayton.

553
00:48:26,640 --> 00:48:31,480
It right now has very substantial generation from community solar gardens and some other

554
00:48:31,480 --> 00:48:32,560
distributed generation.

555
00:48:33,300 --> 00:48:40,060
If Slayton exits our system, we will lose almost 99% of customer load from that substation

556
00:48:40,060 --> 00:48:44,220
which creates a situation where you've got substantial generation and almost no load

557
00:48:44,220 --> 00:48:45,620
to balance it.

558
00:48:46,000 --> 00:48:50,180
It is our obligation to make sure the system is safe and reliable and we are going

559
00:48:50,180 --> 00:48:54,760
to have to do engineering studies to make sure that that substation remains safe

560
00:48:54,760 --> 00:48:56,420
and reliable if slate and exits.

561
00:48:57,380 --> 00:49:02,060
We haven't done that work yet because it will be expensive and we don't want to do it until

562
00:49:02,060 --> 00:49:04,060
slate and has confirmed that they're going to leave.

563
00:49:04,720 --> 00:49:08,000
If we do the engineering studies and there's going to have to be transmission

564
00:49:08,000 --> 00:49:13,000
studies as well. It is possible that they will say everything's fine and then it's just the

565
00:49:13,000 --> 00:49:17,040
cost of the studies. It's possible they're going to show you need significant upgrades to

566
00:49:17,040 --> 00:49:21,580
the transmission system or the substation or that you need to curtail this community solar

567
00:49:21,580 --> 00:49:28,660
gardens until changes are made. All of those costs if they happen would be caused only because

568
00:49:28,660 --> 00:49:33,820
the slate and decision to leave the system. I understand that we haven't quantified it,

569
00:49:33,820 --> 00:49:39,960
don't know how until the studies are done. But what our primary interest is, are other customers

570
00:49:39,960 --> 00:49:46,140
shouldn't have to bear those costs. And so our recommendation would be to modify new decision

571
00:49:46,140 --> 00:49:53,420
option 10A by just striking the words secondary solar interconnection studies so that any engineering

572
00:49:53,420 --> 00:49:59,400
studies that we have to do and any upgrades the identify would be within the scope were entirely

573
00:49:59,400 --> 00:49:59,800
comfortable.

574
00:50:00,000 --> 00:50:05,340
With the idea that we have to prove that the studies were needed, we have to prove that the upgrades identified

575
00:50:05,340 --> 00:50:08,440
were needed and prudent. We don't object to that at all.

576
00:50:10,620 --> 00:50:11,880
But that would be our proposal on

577
00:50:11,880 --> 00:50:12,660
Thanks, Denise.

578
00:50:13,320 --> 00:50:19,860
You know, Mr. Parttree, fine with this this is a small town attorney kicking and why don't

579
00:50:19,860 --> 00:50:22,320
you just say what you just said as opposed to any.

580
00:50:22,960 --> 00:50:28,020
I would be worried if I were representing Slayton that is why it opened to any study.

581
00:50:28,640 --> 00:50:33,820
If it's substation and we limit it to the substation and transmission, connected there

582
00:50:33,820 --> 00:50:39,540
too, I think adding words to it as opposed to deleting words would make more sense.

583
00:50:39,540 --> 00:50:41,960
You're coming to that, Mr. Burl.

584
00:50:43,380 --> 00:50:46,840
Commissioner Tuma, I don't have any objections to adding more words.

585
00:50:47,020 --> 00:50:50,680
I thought it was just easier to take words out, but if you'd like us to develop that

586
00:50:50,680 --> 00:50:53,600
language, we can do it right now if I have a couple of minutes.

587
00:50:54,160 --> 00:50:59,640
And we can do it at some point, but I would feel more comfortable adding, adding what

588
00:50:59,640 --> 00:51:07,000
you just said as opposed to leaving it open to studies, having gone through CSG world, it makes

589
00:51:09,240 --> 00:51:17,660
I just want to ask something really quick and I know I don't want to, while we're on CSG, I just want to be clear to the company.

590
00:51:18,820 --> 00:51:23,440
The company would not, we would have to pay for engineering studies, you'd have to pay for it.

591
00:51:23,440 --> 00:51:29,120
An analysis of what the impact would be, how the system changes around it, I get all that.

592
00:51:29,120 --> 00:51:34,500
But I do want to be clear, the company would no longer be paying the CSG tariff to those

593
00:51:34,500 --> 00:51:46,480
developers, which then flows through to the ultimately the member of the CSG or the subscriber

594
00:51:46,480 --> 00:51:53,000
to the CSG. Thank you, Chair Commissioner Sullivan. I think I understand your question,

595
00:51:53,080 --> 00:51:58,540
but if I miss it, please let me know. So we have confirmed that the CSGs themselves are outside

596
00:51:58,540 --> 00:52:05,640
of city limits. So they'll continue to be, you know, active community solar gardens. We will continue

597
00:52:05,640 --> 00:52:11,780
to have to pay them the community, the value of solar rate for whatever they produce. I don't

598
00:52:11,780 --> 00:52:16,860
know what their relationship is with the customers living in Slayton. But yes, the customers in

599
00:52:16,860 --> 00:52:20,120
Slayton that we're getting bill credits would not get bill credits any longer.

600
00:52:21,400 --> 00:52:29,340
So the developer would get a credit, but the person who is insulated because they're no longer

601
00:52:29,880 --> 00:52:35,840
a customer of Excel energy or no longer qualified for the credit, right?

602
00:52:36,020 --> 00:52:41,080
The subscriber no longer qualifies for the credit because they're no longer a member of whether

603
00:52:41,080 --> 00:52:44,200
no longer a customer of Excel or right pair.

604
00:52:44,620 --> 00:52:46,580
Chair, Commissioner Sullivan, yes, that's right.

605
00:52:46,580 --> 00:52:52,040
We're going to continue to have to pay the solar garden developer for all of the generation

606
00:52:52,040 --> 00:52:57,460
that they produce, but any customers that currently live in slate and won't be eligible

607
00:52:57,460 --> 00:53:02,540
to be a subscriber to the solar gardens because they won't be Excel energy customers any longer.

608
00:53:03,160 --> 00:53:05,260
It's a tough situation for those customers.

609
00:53:06,660 --> 00:53:12,340
There's not a lot that we can do, but we wanted to make sure, like, there's the engineering

610
00:53:12,340 --> 00:53:16,940
issue with the queue then there's this issue about existing customers and there's some of

611
00:53:16,940 --> 00:53:20,840
these things. These are new issues that we haven't seen before we wanted to make sure that the

612
00:53:20,840 --> 00:53:27,120
commission was aware of them. Thank you. One more follow-up on that if I can. Mr. Barlow, when you said

613
00:53:28,280 --> 00:53:33,860
that the company would have to incur legal costs for disputes from subscribers,

614
00:53:36,020 --> 00:53:36,940
why would the company

615
00:53:36,940 --> 00:53:45,340
have to incur those costs, because wouldn't it be up to the city of Slayton now if Slayton

616
00:53:45,340 --> 00:53:51,840
saying, you know, people within Slayton who are current community solar garden subscribers

617
00:53:51,840 --> 00:54:01,600
are going to have to talk to the city about why they lost their CSG subscription, not Excel.

618
00:54:02,540 --> 00:54:03,660
Thank you, Chair.

619
00:54:04,360 --> 00:54:05,580
I guess, thank you, Chair.

620
00:54:07,360 --> 00:54:10,900
There are a few things that we can see as potentials are hope.

621
00:54:11,140 --> 00:54:14,140
And what we believe is most likely is there's no legal disputes.

622
00:54:14,500 --> 00:54:15,560
This can just move forward.

623
00:54:15,740 --> 00:54:18,060
Slating can decide what they want to do and it can be executed.

624
00:54:20,220 --> 00:54:26,780
But if customers have contracts with developers that are Excel energy solar gardens,

625
00:54:27,580 --> 00:54:34,540
It may not be clear to customers that we're not responsible for those solar gardens and, you know, we could get embroiled in those disputes.

626
00:54:35,600 --> 00:54:45,040
We also think there's a possibility that if slate and exit the system, we're going to have to curtail some generation from those solar gardens to keep the system stable until we can do engineering studies.

627
00:54:45,840 --> 00:54:49,340
We don't know if that's possible, if that's going to happen, but it's possible.

628
00:54:49,960 --> 00:54:55,740
This situation is so new we've never experienced the loss of an entire city from our system before.

629
00:54:55,740 --> 00:54:59,960
We think there's some legal risk. Our point of view is that it it shouldn't be

630
00:55:00,000 --> 00:55:14,220
On our customers to pay for that. But I also want to say, this, the legal risk issue is not, you know, we think that's, like, good to include, but it's not the most critical issue to resolve today.

631
00:55:16,890 --> 00:55:31,730
Commissioner Purchage. Can you explain Mr. Barlow if you curtail the community solar gardens in that area? What happens? Do the developers just lose revenue? Do you?

632
00:55:32,410 --> 00:55:35,290
have an obligation to pay?

633
00:55:38,790 --> 00:55:40,970
Yeah, thank you chair commissioner partridge.

634
00:55:41,570 --> 00:55:44,070
I don't think it's entirely clear because again,

635
00:55:44,190 --> 00:55:47,570
I don't want to keep reciting this, but it's not happened before.

636
00:55:48,870 --> 00:55:53,290
If we have to curtail, we don't want to pay for energy that we're not receiving.

637
00:55:53,750 --> 00:55:55,090
And so that would be our intention.

638
00:55:55,650 --> 00:55:58,530
What rights the developers have in that situation, I don't know.

639
00:56:00,260 --> 00:56:18,280
And is the logical result of this that if the commission moves forward now, that will be a dispute between Excel and the city of Slayton to further resolve or is that something that you anticipate will come back to the commission?

640
00:56:19,520 --> 00:56:29,180
Thank you chair. My hope would be that if any of this comes off weekend, we're cooperatively with the city. I know we're here on a dispute here, but we're happy to work with them to resolve anything.

641
00:56:29,180 --> 00:56:34,340
I don't think that sounds like a commission dispute to me that sounds like a court dispute.

642
00:56:34,820 --> 00:56:42,100
And for the city of Slayton, any response to this exchange specifically about CSGs and that,

643
00:56:42,200 --> 00:56:46,740
because I was soon like my fellow commissioners have picked up in the record.

644
00:56:46,880 --> 00:56:55,000
Some of your constituents will be concerned if they lose the subsidy they're getting from their CSG provider.

645
00:56:55,000 --> 00:57:09,060
And I sort of heard through your comments earlier that, you know, that's between the subscriber and the developer to work out that subsidy that they're currently getting.

646
00:57:09,520 --> 00:57:13,090
And it won't necessarily fall on the city of Slayton.

647
00:57:14,220 --> 00:57:20,420
But then when this exchange just happened, it sort of brought up additional complexity.

648
00:57:20,420 --> 00:57:26,560
So what kind of what's your response to what you just heard and what guidance can you give

649
00:57:26,560 --> 00:57:34,560
the commission that you're I think one thing too is we have had a history and since

650
00:57:34,560 --> 00:57:40,420
the community solar gardens inception like a lot of interest from constituents and a lot

651
00:57:40,420 --> 00:57:49,360
of questions that come to our consumer affairs office about it and I anticipate this will continue

652
00:57:49,360 --> 00:57:55,640
in this instance, but is the city pretty comfortable taking on that you are going to have to

653
00:57:55,640 --> 00:58:01,660
proactively talk to your constituents who are community, solar garden, subscribers about what

654
00:58:01,660 --> 00:58:10,320
this means for the subsidy that they get right now. Thank you, Chair Steven. There's a couple of

655
00:58:10,320 --> 00:58:19,340
issues there in your question, and so just to kind of take them in order. I would agree with you

656
00:58:19,340 --> 00:58:25,780
with the CSG issues and so I think the city is fully prepared to do the outreach and work with folks

657
00:58:25,780 --> 00:58:31,880
to talk about and understand that part. In addition to I would echo that the departments

658
00:58:31,880 --> 00:58:37,880
witnessed Mr. Tegel and put in pretty substantial testimony about the kind of the contracting

659
00:58:37,880 --> 00:58:45,380
nature of the different providers out there and how those would be issues between the subscriber

660
00:58:45,380 --> 00:58:51,720
and the developer, and to which neither Excel or the city are parties, right?

661
00:58:52,100 --> 00:58:57,900
And so the company is unfortunately asking the city to kind of indemnify it against

662
00:58:57,900 --> 00:59:03,780
any possible claims that might come up that could potentially fall back on the company without

663
00:59:03,780 --> 00:59:04,860
ever seeing those claims.

664
00:59:05,600 --> 00:59:09,620
So our position is just simply that any claims that come up in the future should just stand on

665
00:59:09,620 --> 00:59:10,200
their own merit.

666
00:59:10,860 --> 00:59:14,860
And if they come up, we can, as Mr. Barlow noted, we can try to work those out, or if we

667
00:59:14,860 --> 00:59:19,860
to let you get those. We could do that. At this point we don't even really know what those

668
00:59:19,860 --> 00:59:25,340
claims would be. Who they would be against if they would be against the city or Excel or

669
00:59:25,340 --> 00:59:31,340
anybody. And frankly we think that that's something that should just stand on its own merits

670
00:59:31,340 --> 00:59:37,440
and then not be predetermined to fall completely on the city of Slay. And what about what Mr. Barlow said

671
00:59:37,440 --> 00:59:43,320
about possibly having to curtail some of the solar gardens in the area? So with respect to the

672
00:59:43,320 --> 00:59:48,300
engineering studies at the substation. I would actually have deferred to Mr. Berg to answer those

673
00:59:48,300 --> 00:59:52,440
questions about the engineering nature of all the load flows through the substation.

674
00:59:54,800 --> 00:59:58,300
Yes, thank you. My name is Dave Berg. I'm a consultant for the City of Slighten.

675
01:00:00,270 --> 01:00:12,770
One of the interesting things about this is so the company is claiming that at times without the city load on their substation, that, let's say, those electrons will flow out of the substation.

676
01:00:13,770 --> 01:00:24,670
What they're not pointing out is the fact that, and it's already constructed, is that nobles co-op is built a new substation, I don't know, a quarter of a mile down the road.

677
01:00:24,670 --> 01:00:31,930
That's connected to the same transmission line that Excel substation is connected to so what will happen is

678
01:00:32,830 --> 01:00:36,270
Those electrons would you know they would flow out of the substation

679
01:00:36,970 --> 01:00:41,890
Quarter of a mile down the road and back into the city through the connection to the noble substation

680
01:00:41,890 --> 01:00:46,730
I've actually done a fair amount of transmission and distribution planning in in my career and this is

681
01:00:47,290 --> 01:00:49,530
This is not an issue in fact

682
01:00:49,530 --> 01:00:53,010
I can tell you right now that there are many times when the city of Slayton load

683
01:00:53,010 --> 01:00:59,130
And let's take a nice spring Sunday, when the load is very low, that those community solar

684
01:00:59,130 --> 01:01:05,190
gardens already are probably generating more power than what is being consumed within the

685
01:01:05,190 --> 01:01:09,330
city of Slayton, and yes, in fact, those electrons are flowing out onto the transmission

686
01:01:09,330 --> 01:01:09,910
system.

687
01:01:10,370 --> 01:01:15,650
But the way our system is designed and built, it handles that, that is not a problem.

688
01:01:16,350 --> 01:01:21,030
And I think from an engineering perspective, that this issue is just not an issue.

689
01:01:21,030 --> 01:01:31,750
I just think it's one of the many things that they've sort of put on the plate to try to make this as difficult as possible for the city of Slayton, but I'd simply do not see this as an issue.

690
01:01:32,530 --> 01:01:37,270
Okay, thank you Commissioner Partridge. Sorry, I can interject it earlier.

691
01:01:49,590 --> 01:01:50,470
Thank you.

692
01:01:50,470 --> 01:01:56,330
And the significant proportion of that energy becomes a non-subscriber, and what will be the

693
01:01:56,330 --> 01:02:05,490
weight, Excel will pay, that the CSG owners, is it avoided cost or is it similar to

694
01:02:05,490 --> 01:02:06,930
a current the CSG weights?

695
01:02:09,100 --> 01:02:10,600
Um, thank you, sir, Commissioner Ham.

696
01:02:10,820 --> 01:02:11,860
That's a good question.

697
01:02:12,100 --> 01:02:16,360
I don't think it has not come up in this case, so I don't know that we've done that analysis.

698
01:02:16,360 --> 01:02:25,320
I think that you're right that it might be the non-subscriber rate, but I can't confirm we can look into that and get back to you if that's something you'd like to know.

699
01:02:25,740 --> 01:02:35,740
Yeah, I don't know. You can say that portion of that 2021 subscriber is getting tinged that units, but it pays us again if it can be not.

700
01:02:36,520 --> 01:02:41,160
I had a concern that those CSG units may not be economically viable.

701
01:02:42,240 --> 01:02:45,080
Then what will happen in under that case?

702
01:02:47,200 --> 01:02:50,560
Well, Chair, Commissioner Ham, that's something we're concerned about.

703
01:02:50,800 --> 01:02:55,500
If this happens and those solar gardens essentially go out of business, we don't know what will happen.

704
01:02:55,860 --> 01:02:58,700
And part of our interest, again, is making sure that whatever happens there,

705
01:02:59,360 --> 01:03:02,200
none of that rules back on our other customers with increased costs.

706
01:03:02,580 --> 01:03:05,540
So what is the Excel's obligation under that case?

707
01:03:08,120 --> 01:03:12,380
Thank you, Chair Commissioner, I think that's a good question, but I just don't know the answer to it.

708
01:03:12,980 --> 01:03:13,520
Thank you.

709
01:03:16,860 --> 01:03:18,440
I do want to talk a little bit about it.

710
01:03:18,660 --> 01:03:24,800
I'd like Mr. Partridge, where you're going with ten and I at concept of ten.

711
01:03:25,480 --> 01:03:30,540
And to me, what's critical for this commission, as we walk out of this hearing,

712
01:03:31,440 --> 01:03:36,080
we get to a clear, identified final number that's not disputed.

713
01:03:36,080 --> 01:03:42,220
that we're not leaving anything open and land. I don't know if you could put up

714
01:03:44,000 --> 01:03:48,780
some additions that I thought to this because I think that's what I'm struggling with and I think

715
01:03:48,780 --> 01:03:52,800
that's where you're trying to get to because I don't want to go back here and get into more

716
01:03:52,800 --> 01:04:04,720
disputes unless we have to and I like to put a nail in this and that is to require them to make

717
01:04:04,720 --> 01:04:10,620
compliance filing, pick a date, and let them pick it, and then they tell us what these

718
01:04:10,620 --> 01:04:17,000
costs are, and then further we have them complete what they think, the final computation

719
01:04:17,000 --> 01:04:24,660
or compensation compensation, English words now, what the final compensation is, Excel tells

720
01:04:24,660 --> 01:04:25,360
it, what that is.

721
01:04:25,600 --> 01:04:30,020
It's like, to me, it's a real estate transaction, okay, I don't go in a real estate transaction

722
01:04:30,020 --> 01:04:34,580
until I have the seller tell me what price they're putting the property up for,

723
01:04:34,580 --> 01:04:38,660
And if I have any escrow afterward, I need to know exactly how that's going to be determined.

724
01:04:39,700 --> 01:04:44,980
And then there's objections within 10 days by the department or the city.

725
01:04:45,300 --> 01:04:50,840
And so I'm just trying to build off of what I think you're trying to accomplish here.

726
01:04:51,400 --> 01:04:57,380
And I certainly would be open to the language that they had talked about adding to it regarding the substation.

727
01:04:57,960 --> 01:04:59,980
Because I hear a lot of things that everybody's saying.

728
01:05:00,460 --> 01:05:15,420
Our related, I don't think they are, but we'll find out, once we do these studies, and that we do our order today, whatever that's going to be, and we can get that number in the record so we can set a date and say we're done.

729
01:05:16,220 --> 01:05:24,020
Because that's our job is to come up with a number of the sales. So I just don't know, you don't have to agree to it now. I just wanted to get it out.

730
01:05:24,020 --> 01:05:28,580
we're talking about Newtann. I would like to build on it to just to credit

731
01:05:28,580 --> 01:05:33,820
create a. This is this is it. We're done. Good luck.

732
01:05:37,000 --> 01:05:37,780
Thank you chair commissioner

733
01:05:37,780 --> 01:05:43,960
Tuma. As I said before we've got no problem showing our homework here. I have I have

734
01:05:43,960 --> 01:05:51,520
two thoughts about this. The first is that this work and the cost to do the work studies

735
01:05:51,520 --> 01:05:55,500
are really only needed if Slayton decides to move forward.

736
01:05:56,580 --> 01:06:02,480
And so we, this case, is to set up just compensation, but Slayton then has a decision

737
01:06:02,480 --> 01:06:08,420
about whether to move forward and when, and so if Slayton decides not to move forward or if

738
01:06:08,420 --> 01:06:10,740
it takes them some time to make that decision.

739
01:06:10,800 --> 01:06:17,420
For example, if the transfer is happening a year and a half from now, I'm not an engineer,

740
01:06:17,420 --> 01:06:23,880
but having spoken with the engineers, that timing means like how long are the results of an engineering study good.

741
01:06:24,920 --> 01:06:33,920
Um, so we will do it, but our intent was to not do the studies until Slayton had told us they're going forward so that we know that the results are most accurate.

742
01:06:34,580 --> 01:06:37,300
I don't think that this timing fits perfectly into there.

743
01:06:37,580 --> 01:06:39,860
I'm not sure right now how to solve it.

744
01:06:40,100 --> 01:06:47,080
The other is that I would just want to make sure and it's our intent that we do the studies and then we talk with Slayton about them.

745
01:06:47,080 --> 01:06:53,540
So whatever timing is set I want to make sure there's time like our preference would not be we do the studies

746
01:06:53,540 --> 01:06:58,640
We file them the slate and only has 10 days to object our preference would be we do the studies

747
01:06:58,640 --> 01:07:02,100
We meet with slate and if they want to have their engineers look at it

748
01:07:02,100 --> 01:07:05,700
They get that chance. We resolve it without having to come back to the commission

749
01:07:05,700 --> 01:07:11,600
That's some of this is my frustration with this whole thing is if we're gonna keep dragging things out forever and ever

750
01:07:11,600 --> 01:07:18,140
whenever, you know, our job is to come up with a compensation rate, and I was hoping that we

751
01:07:18,140 --> 01:07:23,100
could accomplish that today. I mean, it sounds like the department has given me a number

752
01:07:23,100 --> 01:07:29,300
from the ALJ, but you seem to keep wanting to throw things in. And so that's what I'm trying to,

753
01:07:29,560 --> 01:07:35,400
I'm struggling with here. I want to give a number. That's our obligation in duty to

754
01:07:35,940 --> 01:07:40,340
Slayton. They're the petitioned us, and they asked for a number. I want to give them a number.

755
01:07:40,340 --> 01:07:42,160
and you're telling me, we can't give them a number.

756
01:07:42,860 --> 01:07:44,060
Thank you, Chair Commissioner Tuma.

757
01:07:45,280 --> 01:07:47,560
If the Commission tells us to do the studies now,

758
01:07:47,600 --> 01:07:48,340
we will do them.

759
01:07:48,380 --> 01:07:50,180
But what that means is there's a possibility

760
01:07:50,180 --> 01:07:52,980
that when the transfer happens, something about the system

761
01:07:52,980 --> 01:07:55,280
has changed, that means it's different results,

762
01:07:55,860 --> 01:07:58,000
and then we can't recover that from Slayton,

763
01:07:58,180 --> 01:08:00,600
and it's our other customers paying for those costs.

764
01:08:01,440 --> 01:08:03,320
Our primary goal is to avoid that.

765
01:08:03,440 --> 01:08:05,580
I understand the goal that you're trying to set

766
01:08:05,580 --> 01:08:06,560
and they're in conflict.

767
01:08:08,140 --> 01:08:13,220
So, Slayton, help me walk through this, I'm trying to get you a number, I don't know what

768
01:08:13,220 --> 01:08:14,180
you're looking for today.

769
01:08:14,740 --> 01:08:19,420
My goal is to give you a number, I actually think I would have found in your favor if I

770
01:08:19,420 --> 01:08:20,160
was ALJ.

771
01:08:20,340 --> 01:08:24,600
I thought you mentioned burden, but that's neither here nor there, we have to have that discussion

772
01:08:24,600 --> 01:08:25,080
later.

773
01:08:25,660 --> 01:08:30,580
But I'm looking at this now, post whatever you decide, because a five of us have to decide,

774
01:08:30,580 --> 01:08:35,540
I'm trying to get to a final, this is done.

775
01:08:36,180 --> 01:08:38,640
I also don't want to shift costs on to other ratepayers.

776
01:08:39,260 --> 01:08:39,900
So help me out.

777
01:08:40,340 --> 01:08:44,180
What would you recommend as far as let's get the final number

778
01:08:44,180 --> 01:08:45,840
in this dock at its closed?

779
01:08:46,820 --> 01:08:47,980
Thank you, Commissioner.

780
01:08:48,200 --> 01:08:48,420
Two months.

781
01:08:48,620 --> 01:08:53,880
I think the two modified new 10A.

782
01:08:55,610 --> 01:08:58,870
I think it achieves what the city has asked for in this

783
01:08:58,870 --> 01:09:09,190
and that it provides for some close scrutiny of whether these costs are necessary and prudent and for us to actually look at what they are.

784
01:09:09,570 --> 01:09:22,470
And so I think from the city's perspective, we would be okay with something similar to the proposed option that's up on the screen here with the idea that I don't disagree with Mr. Barlow that they would be nice to talk to them about it.

785
01:09:22,470 --> 01:09:31,390
I also think that 10 days to look at a study and to say whether or not we have projections to it is more than adequate to just look at it and see if we object.

786
01:09:31,970 --> 01:09:36,030
And so I think that doesn't mean that we can't then talk about it after the fact.

787
01:09:36,410 --> 01:09:40,550
And so I think this this option has modified sets up.

788
01:09:43,470 --> 01:09:48,490
We're going to give it back to you and it's going to be an absurd number.

789
01:09:48,490 --> 01:09:56,370
Your expert witness is convinced it's not going to be an absurd number. That's where I'm going to guess it's going to be okay, but again

790
01:09:57,510 --> 01:09:59,970
Let's say it's an absurd number and

791
01:10:00,000 --> 01:10:06,980
You guys all decide, you know what? We're pulling the plug. Nobles, we're not going forward. It's done. Okay.

792
01:10:07,500 --> 01:10:18,280
At some point, I don't want to pay for that study. Okay. Is there a desire or agreement that you have as far as study payments that you have if you do not go forward?

793
01:10:20,020 --> 01:10:24,120
Good question, Commissioner, too much, I see that that's not something that we've talked

794
01:10:24,120 --> 01:10:24,780
about.

795
01:10:25,380 --> 01:10:32,000
I would say that coming up with an estimate of these costs is not the same as doing the

796
01:10:32,000 --> 01:10:32,600
full study.

797
01:10:32,980 --> 01:10:36,780
Right, I think it would be reasonable to require an estimate of the cost, which would be something

798
01:10:36,780 --> 01:10:41,280
less than actually having the engineers crunch all the numbers and do the study.

799
01:10:42,000 --> 01:10:48,060
Because as I understand, Mr. Barlow was talking about, is the study itself plus then all

800
01:10:48,060 --> 01:10:55,320
things that the study then recommends, and so I think that's a level of detail that's not

801
01:10:55,320 --> 01:11:00,240
absolutely necessary for what we're talking about here. And so I think our compromise would

802
01:11:00,240 --> 01:11:07,080
be to ask for estimates, at least that we could look at and potentially object to the estimates.

803
01:11:10,080 --> 01:11:14,660
So thank you, Chair Sivan. Commissioner Tuma, and then to the city of Slayton,

804
01:11:14,660 --> 01:11:23,560
And I appreciate that, but the issue that I'm concerned about is that we do an engineering

805
01:11:23,560 --> 01:11:29,860
study find there are required upgrades, and we've already given you a number and you're

806
01:11:29,860 --> 01:11:30,980
on your way.

807
01:11:31,800 --> 01:11:35,440
Mr. Barlow, who pays for the upgrades if that happens?

808
01:11:36,080 --> 01:11:37,420
Thank you, Chair Commissioner Partridge.

809
01:11:37,560 --> 01:11:38,720
It would be our other customers.

810
01:11:38,980 --> 01:11:40,040
It would be included in rates.

811
01:11:40,040 --> 01:11:46,200
The problem that I see is that we can't legally tell them they cannot recover those costs.

812
01:11:46,440 --> 01:11:49,040
We can't tell Excel to eat those costs.

813
01:11:50,360 --> 01:11:51,360
That's unconstitutional.

814
01:11:53,000 --> 01:12:00,100
So I am very uncomfortable with the idea that we just set a number so that you can make a decision.

815
01:12:00,940 --> 01:12:04,200
And then we find out that there are significant upgrades.

816
01:12:04,200 --> 01:12:13,260
we find out that CSG owners are suing Excel energy because they're being curtailed, or any other

817
01:12:13,260 --> 01:12:19,880
number of things that are in this record and then existing customers are just pain those.

818
01:12:20,540 --> 01:12:34,000
You all have left the system. We have no authority to come back and tell you that you need to help

819
01:12:34,000 --> 01:12:39,760
As we've said, we are all really sympathetic to the service issues that you're experiencing.

820
01:12:40,060 --> 01:12:46,320
Did you consider just filing a formal complaint with us so that we could initiate an

821
01:12:46,320 --> 01:12:48,860
investigation and require upgrades?

822
01:12:49,520 --> 01:12:56,830
I mean, I know that that takes time, but so does a transfer.

823
01:12:59,740 --> 01:13:00,880
Thank you, Commissioner.

824
01:13:03,300 --> 01:13:07,720
We're fixating on a couple of things here and I think we're in my

825
01:13:07,720 --> 01:13:13,980
opinion maybe missing the force of the trees here. We initially started talking about this over

826
01:13:13,980 --> 01:13:18,120
four years ago as a city council in a community because of the service if you use and it

827
01:13:18,120 --> 01:13:25,400
blossomed into more than that. It's the fact that end user rates are 19 and a half to 21 and a half

828
01:13:25,400 --> 01:13:54,740
and our feasibility study were significantly lower than that, and so it's not shell and one sentence, it's we think we can offer better, more responsive service for the same or cheaper rate, and so it is not a while you guys can have to love the handle here, because you have some service issues, it is a list of four or five things and not just one.

829
01:13:55,540 --> 01:14:03,780
The community solar garden thing is so unique because it is a program that's in state

830
01:14:03,780 --> 01:14:09,660
statute and is to my knowledge somebody correct me if I'm wrong only with Excel energy, right?

831
01:14:10,040 --> 01:14:18,720
And so we as a community are not saying tough everyone we don't care about your community solar garden

832
01:14:18,720 --> 01:14:26,520
subscription, but nobles, nor, sleep, and municipal electric has the opportunity to mirror

833
01:14:26,520 --> 01:14:30,140
that program, because we don't have the statutory authority to do that.

834
01:14:30,260 --> 01:14:34,200
So we are sympathetic to people losing their credit.

835
01:14:35,520 --> 01:14:41,880
We have every intention of offering, rebate type of programs that nobles already has.

836
01:14:41,980 --> 01:14:48,460
We would mirror their programs or off-peek on-peek, is it solar, perhaps not, is it

837
01:14:48,460 --> 01:14:55,920
energy usage based programs, absolutely. But as the testimony is already showed and we've

838
01:14:55,920 --> 01:14:59,960
kind of sent a few times here. I don't know if the community solar garden issue.

839
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:11,820
Is directly part of this discussion today? Because it would be between the subscriber and the, you know, we're just the just compensation part.

840
01:15:12,680 --> 01:15:26,300
Mr. Malchaya, I appreciate that. I think, from my perspective, it's not that I feel strongly that those subscribers deserve solar garden subscriptions. That's not what I'm voicing a concern about.

841
01:15:26,300 --> 01:15:36,740
I appreciate that you will have other opportunities for them to roll in perhaps other programs that can provide similar benefits, whether they're still there or not. That's great.

842
01:15:37,020 --> 01:15:53,300
The issue I have is all of the complex contractual agreements that both the subscriber has and that will be outside of our jurisdiction, but may implicate the company.

843
01:15:54,060 --> 01:16:02,180
may implicate the city again, not my problem, but also then the obligation that the company

844
01:16:02,180 --> 01:16:10,580
has to those CSG owners and the costs that that could put on other rate pairs.

845
01:16:12,620 --> 01:16:19,840
You know, it is a program there, there, they exist, what, you know, so we have to think about

846
01:16:19,840 --> 01:16:26,320
cost that they will cause to excel system because we don't want additional costs to be borne

847
01:16:26,320 --> 01:16:32,320
by existing ratepayers who are outside of the city of Sleaten. And this is very challenging

848
01:16:33,800 --> 01:16:38,820
because it isn't just a real estate transaction. You're not just buying house, you're not

849
01:16:38,820 --> 01:16:48,200
just buying assets. This is a long-term service as well. And so it is very challenging to say, you know,

850
01:16:48,200 --> 01:16:54,180
Here is the amount we're going to include this lean, you know, we're going to put it all together.

851
01:16:54,500 --> 01:17:00,180
It's the one-time payment and then we move on because they're all of these additional pieces

852
01:17:00,180 --> 01:17:03,760
that we don't really know what they're going to cost.

853
01:17:07,570 --> 01:17:11,370
I'll just leave it at that and turn it over.

854
01:17:12,090 --> 01:17:15,190
That was a really helpful commissioner for our church. Thank you.

855
01:17:15,190 --> 01:17:21,230
And my question, oh, sorry, did you, did you want to respond

856
01:17:21,230 --> 01:17:23,270
to Commissioner Parchage, please go ahead?

857
01:17:23,770 --> 01:17:26,210
If I may, you've seen Commissioner Parchage.

858
01:17:27,170 --> 01:17:28,610
I see that there's two issues, right?

859
01:17:28,650 --> 01:17:31,650
So one is the potential litigation between subscribers

860
01:17:32,110 --> 01:17:32,830
and the developers.

861
01:17:33,370 --> 01:17:36,270
And so our position on that is that that's litigation

862
01:17:36,270 --> 01:17:38,330
and to the extent that that overflows

863
01:17:38,330 --> 01:17:40,370
on either the city or the company.

864
01:17:40,970 --> 01:17:43,050
Those are 100% issues that can be dealt

865
01:17:43,050 --> 01:17:44,370
within the litigation, right?

866
01:17:44,370 --> 01:17:49,710
So if somebody sues and it goes to the company and they disagree with that, they would have

867
01:17:49,710 --> 01:17:53,650
the right in that litigation to employ the city and say it's not our fault, it's the

868
01:17:53,650 --> 01:17:54,190
city's fault.

869
01:17:54,510 --> 01:17:57,270
And so we could deal with those issues in those cases.

870
01:17:57,570 --> 01:17:58,690
Let me just stop you there.

871
01:17:58,690 --> 01:18:00,010
Who pays for their lawyers?

872
01:18:01,210 --> 01:18:03,850
Again, that's something that we could address in that litigation.

873
01:18:04,010 --> 01:18:07,870
There's attorneys, fees, provisions, and some of these things, I don't have those in front

874
01:18:07,870 --> 01:18:08,130
of me.

875
01:18:08,170 --> 01:18:09,650
I'm not sure how any of that would go.

876
01:18:09,810 --> 01:18:14,170
And so we're just asking that the Commission not prejudged that and let those claims stand

877
01:18:14,170 --> 01:18:17,210
or fall on their own merit and that we would work those out at the time.

878
01:18:17,930 --> 01:18:20,030
So, so, does the first thing I want to respond to?

879
01:18:20,410 --> 01:18:25,470
Secondly, is just, again, the issue of the engineering studies related to the transfer.

880
01:18:26,170 --> 01:18:32,610
And I think our testimony was pretty clear that we generally agreed with Mr. Tiglund on that.

881
01:18:32,750 --> 01:18:38,070
And that our two expert witnesses, Mr. Berg and then Mr. Mitchell, both looked at this

882
01:18:38,070 --> 01:18:45,290
said that there did not appear to be any kind of transition, or transmission, interconnection,

883
01:18:45,430 --> 01:18:52,130
study required by myself, but that recognized that Excel may have its own business practices,

884
01:18:52,750 --> 01:18:58,110
that it perhaps would want to do one. Right? And so to the extent that Excel wants to study something,

885
01:18:59,370 --> 01:19:05,010
we feel that that's their optional kind of exploratory thing, that if they wish to do that,

886
01:19:05,010 --> 01:19:11,370
that that's not necessarily caused by the city's leaving a system right it's not

887
01:19:11,370 --> 01:19:16,210
mandatory by my so it's not mandatory by the commission and it's just Excel it's choosing

888
01:19:16,210 --> 01:19:20,710
to do this and so that those costs should not necessarily fall back on the city.

889
01:19:21,090 --> 01:19:32,010
To the city, the voter approved amount, I can say the number is $7 million that is the initial

890
01:19:32,010 --> 01:19:40,810
payment is my understanding and then there's the mill rate that's added on I mean that wasn't

891
01:19:40,810 --> 01:19:51,330
contemplated in the voter approved referendum was it? Is there like does the mill my thinking here

892
01:19:51,330 --> 01:19:59,910
is that could we adjust the mill rate to account for the unknown C.S.G.

893
01:20:01,660 --> 01:20:29,980
So the essentially like once we know what the result of the CSG leaving the system and what Excel said about there could be real costs that are borne by Excel rate pairs could those costs, so that they're not coming on to Excel rate pairs, be subsumed into the mill rate.

894
01:20:30,000 --> 01:20:40,620
in some way so that you would still have an initial payment that is, you know, if we did the

895
01:20:40,620 --> 01:20:47,880
ALJ suggestion, it's still under the cap that your voters approved, but then the mill rate could

896
01:20:47,880 --> 01:20:57,540
escalate to account for the true costs for slayton to take over the service territory and that

897
01:20:57,540 --> 01:21:02,980
could be determined like at the mill rate could be adjusted at a different, through a different

898
01:21:02,980 --> 01:21:09,340
process or I don't know what it is. I'm just trying to think through like how we solve this

899
01:21:09,980 --> 01:21:16,720
because to my colleagues' points, like we need to know what we're approving so that we're

900
01:21:16,720 --> 01:21:25,640
doing our due diligence to come up with a fair conclusion for slate and but also for the

901
01:21:25,640 --> 01:21:33,940
of Excel, subscribers who are, we don't, we know that we can't have them bare significant

902
01:21:33,940 --> 01:21:39,620
costs because that would be unjust and unfair. So do you understand my question and does

903
01:21:39,620 --> 01:21:46,000
it make sense? It does. Hopefully you understand my answer because that might go a little bit too.

904
01:21:46,000 --> 01:21:54,980
I would Commissioner Homb asked very specific questions about this.

905
01:21:55,120 --> 01:21:57,720
What is the specific financial impact?

906
01:21:57,900 --> 01:22:01,540
Who pays subscribers or the tariffs and all that?

907
01:22:02,140 --> 01:22:07,160
Nobody in this room, including myself or Mr. Bottleow or anybody,

908
01:22:07,600 --> 01:22:10,520
seems to know that answer right now today.

909
01:22:10,520 --> 01:22:19,240
And so, I think if you're asking, I'll answer your question in two parts, Madam Chair.

910
01:22:19,980 --> 01:22:30,340
I think implementation wise, yes, that's if the commission orders that as a future adjuster to the mill rate, certainly,

911
01:22:32,780 --> 01:22:33,300
politically,

912
01:22:33,300 --> 01:22:42,860
physically, does that mean that we would agree with that? I would say no. I mean that seems like this open

913
01:22:42,860 --> 01:22:49,720
checkbook type of idea that we've opposed in our testimony thus far of this ongoing CSG issue that

914
01:22:49,720 --> 01:22:57,340
right now, nobody can answer if it's going to fall directly on the Excel rate pairs. I understand

915
01:22:57,340 --> 01:23:02,040
completely that it's within the purview of the commission to protect those rate pairs after

916
01:23:02,040 --> 01:23:08,120
eggs of the system. But I'm not hearing that anybody knows that whether that damage, so to

917
01:23:08,120 --> 01:23:15,960
speak, is going to truly happen or not. Yeah. Okay. In relation to Commissioner Tuma's proposed

918
01:23:15,960 --> 01:23:19,160
language, Mr. Wears already answered that generally,

919
01:23:22,460 --> 01:23:24,380
but Mr. Bottle was saying, well, we don't

920
01:23:24,380 --> 01:23:30,020
want to do anything until we know that slate and is going to leave, Mr. Commissioner Tuma

921
01:23:30,020 --> 01:23:34,920
question it among that and I would mirror those questions like what we can't say that we're

922
01:23:34,920 --> 01:23:43,120
going to leave if the acquisition cost is $50 million in the middle rate is 116.79. That's

923
01:23:43,120 --> 01:23:47,280
not going to work. That's not fiscally responsible for the city of Slating in any way shape

924
01:23:47,280 --> 01:23:54,380
or form. So if the acquisition cost is $4 million in the middle rate is $4.5 million or 20

925
01:23:54,380 --> 01:24:00,920
whatever, then we can have a discussion. But if the order from the PUC is going to be the

926
01:24:00,920 --> 01:24:08,380
four and a half and then the 116.79, like that, that's the main issue here. And I understand

927
01:24:08,380 --> 01:24:14,760
that CSG is part of that middle rate calculation, but is it the most large part, or are there

928
01:24:14,760 --> 01:24:20,160
other things that we need to talk about here to see where that middle rate is at?

929
01:24:20,160 --> 01:24:26,860
And Mr. Barlow, for the company, is that in your estimation is the adjustment of the

930
01:24:26,860 --> 01:24:35,840
mill rate, something that could be a path forward for the utility for Excel to come to

931
01:24:35,840 --> 01:24:37,500
agreement with Slayton.

932
01:24:38,340 --> 01:24:38,920
Thank you, Chair.

933
01:24:41,000 --> 01:24:46,280
I'll say first that we would prefer that it be included in the mill rate as opposed to

934
01:24:46,280 --> 01:24:46,720
excluded.

935
01:24:47,240 --> 01:24:55,920
But, as I understand what you're suggesting, what that would involve is that we do the studies that will have some cost.

936
01:24:56,520 --> 01:24:59,960
And it may be as Mr. Berg suggests, and we don't have to do any up.

937
01:25:00,000 --> 01:25:16,440
And that's a great outcome. We feel that it's only responsible for us to do the studies. If significant upgrades are required, put in them in the mill rate, what that means is we outlay all the money to make those investments. And we recover it over time.

938
01:25:17,380 --> 01:25:22,440
How long would it take you to do that? The engineering studies that we're talking about here?

939
01:25:22,600 --> 01:25:26,140
I have that question. I have that question. I have six weeks or six weeks.

940
01:25:28,200 --> 01:25:31,520
I have that question out to the team and I don't have any answer yet.

941
01:25:31,520 --> 01:25:33,820
I don't think it's a year, I don't think it's six weeks.

942
01:25:34,500 --> 01:25:39,420
I'd hope it's less than six months, but it depends on the complexity once we get into it.

943
01:25:40,200 --> 01:25:44,580
Again, I don't want to over-complicate this, but there's an active interconnection queue in the region.

944
01:25:45,660 --> 01:25:50,020
As Miss Hundall noted, those projects are currently not moving forward,

945
01:25:50,020 --> 01:26:00,240
But if projects like part of the issue is when you're losing load and adding gardens like there's multiple studies happening at the same time and our engineers just haven't done that before.

946
01:26:00,980 --> 01:26:14,780
I mean, so it's not a good resolution then to just like table the issue and wait for you to do the engineering studies because then the city would be waiting and those.

947
01:26:14,780 --> 01:26:39,680
I mean, I'm just and I'll turn to the department for what they recommend, but it seems like we don't have a full record to determine the just compensation for all parties here, and I guess I'm just trying to be like what's the way out of this and how long will it take to have a fuller record so then we can decide.

948
01:26:40,300 --> 01:26:44,080
Thank you, Chair. The first thing I want to say, I do think you have the record to move forward.

949
01:26:44,220 --> 01:26:59,380
I understand that it wouldn't be Commissioner Tuma's preference, but we think the Commission can and shouldn't move forward today with the recommendations, recognizing that some of these issues about engineering studies will get resolved over time, and if they're disputes, those limited issues can come back.

950
01:26:59,420 --> 01:27:09,600
Are you just saying, Mr. Barlow, you're fine with Excel rate pairs taking on those costs, then? Because like that's a solution for Excel is then.

951
01:27:10,900 --> 01:27:15,600
like the commissions left with passing along the costs for

952
01:27:16,920 --> 01:27:20,700
significant CSG costs that you've alluded to.

953
01:27:21,180 --> 01:27:24,000
And then the commission is left with saying, like, you know,

954
01:27:24,040 --> 01:27:27,820
slate and out of the picture and Excel will come to us and be like,

955
01:27:27,820 --> 01:27:31,720
well, you said we had to do this. So here's the bill passing on to

956
01:27:31,720 --> 01:27:35,620
rate pairs. Like, it's not a, it's not a great

957
01:27:35,620 --> 01:27:47,480
Solution for us here. I apologize if I'm a spoke that's not at all what I was suggesting. What I was suggesting is the commission should find that those things will be included in just compensation at the time of the transfer.

958
01:27:48,020 --> 01:27:50,640
With an order point like that, we're comfortable getting to work.

959
01:27:51,160 --> 01:27:55,200
Because then, sorry just so I understand, I'm sorry I'm slow.

960
01:27:55,200 --> 01:28:00,140
that you're saying some of those costs could be incorporated into the

961
01:28:00,140 --> 01:28:09,340
mill rate even though we don't know what that is and then or you're saying, sorry, I don't get

962
01:28:09,340 --> 01:28:15,860
way. Yeah, I think you're hearing studies and this cost attributable to the CSG like

963
01:28:15,860 --> 01:28:21,340
leaving the system or not. How does those costs not get passed back to Excel rate

964
01:28:21,340 --> 01:28:21,720
Cheers.

965
01:28:22,280 --> 01:28:29,520
Chair, I think the only potential risk, if the Commission moves forward as we have recommended,

966
01:28:29,840 --> 01:28:33,560
is if we do the engineering studies and then slightness is not to leave.

967
01:28:34,360 --> 01:28:35,400
Those would be costs.

968
01:28:35,700 --> 01:28:39,720
We might, I'm assuming, slighting, I mean, we can talk to slightness, slighting is willing

969
01:28:39,720 --> 01:28:40,540
to cover those.

970
01:28:41,240 --> 01:28:46,040
But those costs are meaningful, but we don't anticipate that will be like the studies

971
01:28:46,040 --> 01:28:47,920
themselves won't be many millions of dollars.

972
01:28:48,520 --> 01:28:50,640
So we think that's a solvable problem.

973
01:28:50,640 --> 01:28:54,480
In the alternative, as we have indicated in our papers, if

974
01:28:54,480 --> 01:28:58,900
slateness willing to agree that they'll pay for the studies, we'll get going immediately.

975
01:29:00,440 --> 01:29:01,990
Like that's something we're prepared to do.

976
01:29:03,040 --> 01:29:07,840
So Commissioner Partridge, I think, thank you chair. I think just to clarify that

977
01:29:09,650 --> 01:29:16,790
I think different from Commissioner Tuma's interpretation of what just compensation would be.

978
01:29:16,790 --> 01:29:21,630
You know, the ALJ didn't determine a number, but instead the formula.

979
01:29:22,430 --> 01:29:29,430
And then my additional decision options build on that formula, which means there wouldn't be a number today.

980
01:29:29,550 --> 01:29:35,430
There would be sort of a formula that says the ALJ's recommendation is this.

981
01:29:35,550 --> 01:29:42,210
It doesn't include a mill rate, but then it would leave open other categories to be calculated.

982
01:29:42,210 --> 01:29:59,970
And I think to the city of Slayton, that's perhaps inadequate for you to feel comfortable making a decision because we don't have a number, I think, from my perspective, it's a chicken and eggs thing where we don't know the number because...

983
01:30:00,460 --> 01:30:17,540
First of all, this is novel. We've not had this happen before I think the ALJ mentioned we have done territory transfers, but we've never had municipalization happen, at least in recent history where any of us can remember, find it.

984
01:30:17,540 --> 01:30:25,900
And so, we're walking into this unknown and having a specific number and choosing that

985
01:30:25,900 --> 01:30:32,820
and selecting it today to chair Steven's point, leaves us open to potentially additional

986
01:30:32,820 --> 01:30:41,540
cost-getting born by existing rate pairs, whereas leaving it open to a formula-based definition

987
01:30:41,540 --> 01:30:48,880
of just compensation, leaves you all open, the city of Flaton, to potential risk that studies

988
01:30:48,880 --> 01:30:55,760
identify upgrades, study costs, or higher than expected, and you have to bear that, or litigation

989
01:30:57,440 --> 01:31:06,940
from CSG owners, etc, etc. So I think we're kind of, I feel like we're stuck in between

990
01:31:06,940 --> 01:31:11,380
you're not going to hear a place where I feel like I don't want to give you a specific number

991
01:31:11,380 --> 01:31:18,120
and then find out later that their additional costs and now you're gone and we have

992
01:31:18,120 --> 01:31:20,680
no choice but to pass them to ratepayers.

993
01:31:21,420 --> 01:31:26,400
I think that's where I was trying to get to Mr. Partridge is that at some point we have

994
01:31:26,400 --> 01:31:29,140
to come up with a number and we have to just do the studies.

995
01:31:29,700 --> 01:31:33,760
That's why I was trying to build off your number 10, you're saying let's go and let's get

996
01:31:33,760 --> 01:31:37,900
that stuff done and I agree with your formula argument. We're not going to get the number

997
01:31:37,900 --> 01:31:43,720
today. We're just going to get some path forward, but I would like that path forward to

998
01:31:43,720 --> 01:31:51,220
have an end. That's what I'm trying to say. Let's just do this study. Frankly, the CSG argument

999
01:31:51,220 --> 01:31:57,740
about the subscribers, none of our business. It's going to be a mess. I think we've let them know

1000
01:31:57,740 --> 01:32:03,360
that's going to be a mess. I think they know that now and it's not our problem. But the problem

1001
01:32:03,360 --> 01:32:07,120
is that distribution system and transmission system

1002
01:32:07,120 --> 01:32:09,600
interconnected how they interrelate to each other.

1003
01:32:09,680 --> 01:32:11,640
It needs to be studied, and we need to know

1004
01:32:11,640 --> 01:32:13,940
if there needs to be any upgrades to the substations.

1005
01:32:14,800 --> 01:32:17,240
And it sounds like they're not worried about it.

1006
01:32:17,380 --> 01:32:18,580
Even I've heard indications.

1007
01:32:18,880 --> 01:32:20,160
They're not too worried about it,

1008
01:32:20,240 --> 01:32:22,780
but we just need to know what the cost of this study is.

1009
01:32:23,060 --> 01:32:24,640
And if it were me sitting there with my clients,

1010
01:32:24,760 --> 01:32:28,620
I would say, you know what, client, let's just split the cost.

1011
01:32:29,580 --> 01:32:31,100
This is our escrow here.

1012
01:32:31,100 --> 01:32:35,760
Let's just split the cost of these studies before we degree to that, though they have to give

1013
01:32:35,760 --> 01:32:39,980
them an estimate of what the study's cost is going to be, and they have to be okay with,

1014
01:32:39,980 --> 01:32:44,940
and I would probably add that to this decision option within 10 days of today.

1015
01:32:45,080 --> 01:32:50,280
They have to give them an estimate of what those costs are, and then let's let them work

1016
01:32:50,280 --> 01:32:56,940
out these last details after we know what the cost of this study tells us, and that should

1017
01:32:56,940 --> 01:33:03,980
give us a number. That's what I'm thinking but I could be often law law land. We won't

1018
01:33:03,980 --> 01:33:15,020
comment on that. No, what the vote would be. I don't think. No, no, no, five. You would be

1019
01:33:15,020 --> 01:33:22,600
with me on the thank you. Mr. Barlow. Thank you chair. I apologize for raising my hand. I

1020
01:33:22,600 --> 01:33:26,480
don't have a response. I just we've heard back on the timing. What we're hearing right

1021
01:33:26,480 --> 01:33:32,060
is that a distribution study takes four to six months. Transmission study precedes on my

1022
01:33:32,060 --> 01:33:37,600
so schedule. So we understand that that happens quarterly and if it's unusually complicated

1023
01:33:37,600 --> 01:33:43,140
could take a couple of extra months if upgrades are identified that extends the myso time line

1024
01:33:43,140 --> 01:33:48,040
and the myso time line is not entirely in our control. Fisher Sullivan.

1025
01:33:50,500 --> 01:33:51,040
This is just good to

1026
01:33:51,040 --> 01:33:58,740
think you're in stink here. I mean, I, I just, Commissioner Tuma, one thing I, I don't,

1027
01:33:59,440 --> 01:34:05,540
the way that I heard Mr. Barlow's response to one of my questions was that the CSG problem

1028
01:34:05,540 --> 01:34:13,600
would become our problem if Excel rate pairs are paying for basically like ghost CSG facilities

1029
01:34:13,600 --> 01:34:19,240
that there are no subscribers to anymore. Like, and then those done facilities would have

1030
01:34:19,240 --> 01:34:25,420
be curtailed, I mean those that would be millions of dollars that would be going for effectively

1031
01:34:25,420 --> 01:34:25,900
nothing.

1032
01:34:26,080 --> 01:34:26,960
Why is that the record?

1033
01:34:27,400 --> 01:34:31,880
Well, precisely, I harm the percent of grade, why isn't that in the record?

1034
01:34:32,920 --> 01:34:35,200
I'm a complete agreement with you on that.

1035
01:34:37,040 --> 01:34:44,040
But I don't know, like I do want to say, like I am super annoyed with Excel, not YouTube

1036
01:34:44,040 --> 01:34:48,500
personally, but I'm annoyed with the company, because this is a problem that the company

1037
01:34:48,500 --> 01:34:59,980
created with the service. And, you know, we've been having issues with service in Southern Minnesota for a long time, and I think it's been getting better, but I mean the example.

1038
01:35:00,000 --> 01:35:05,100
Those that I read in the Star of Tribune and some of this is just completely unacceptable and now you

1039
01:35:05,100 --> 01:35:11,140
got the community that is completely 100% against you. And this is a problem that created the

1040
01:35:11,140 --> 01:35:19,060
original sin is the poor service that this company rendered in the city of Slayton. And I

1041
01:35:19,060 --> 01:35:25,220
You know, I'm Mr. Bala, I'll give you a chance to respond, but like, so I'm, but I really

1042
01:35:25,220 --> 01:35:29,980
am sitting here today, and I'm thinking, and I really appreciate all the work that

1043
01:35:29,980 --> 01:35:35,060
Commissioner Parcher has done in this conversation, but I'm super uncomfortable. We could

1044
01:35:35,060 --> 01:35:39,400
set up a formula. The city of Slayton's not going to like that. We could set up a number,

1045
01:35:39,880 --> 01:35:47,860
and then, sort of, or Excel rate pairs are completely at risk. And like, you know, to

1046
01:35:47,860 --> 01:35:52,600
like, I totally agree, you're like, well, yeah, I don't know what the number is going to be.

1047
01:35:53,020 --> 01:35:56,140
Like, it could be a black check. I mean, the flip of that is what we're facing.

1048
01:35:57,440 --> 01:36:03,200
And I have no faith that, you know, you're going to come back with some of the engineering analysis,

1049
01:36:03,200 --> 01:36:07,780
and I don't think the city's going to be cool with that. I think they're like, oh my God, this is ridiculous.

1050
01:36:09,180 --> 01:36:11,360
And I mean, I don't know.

1051
01:36:12,360 --> 01:36:16,200
Maybe this is more of deliberations and not questions, but I'm just like,

1052
01:36:17,160 --> 01:36:19,380
Let's let Mr. Barlow respond.

1053
01:36:20,080 --> 01:36:20,460
Thank you, Chair.

1054
01:36:20,980 --> 01:36:21,840
Commissioner Sullivan.

1055
01:36:22,960 --> 01:36:25,840
I do have to respond on the service quality issues.

1056
01:36:26,020 --> 01:36:27,760
Commissioner, I recognize your frustration.

1057
01:36:28,880 --> 01:36:31,940
There have obviously been incidents in slate and they're very unfortunate.

1058
01:36:32,340 --> 01:36:34,660
We're not trying to walk away from those.

1059
01:36:34,660 --> 01:36:36,180
Those things should not have happened.

1060
01:36:37,080 --> 01:36:40,840
But I think it's also important that the decisions in this case

1061
01:36:40,840 --> 01:36:43,480
not be made based on specific incidents.

1062
01:36:43,480 --> 01:36:46,460
As you acknowledged earlier when you look at the long-term data,

1063
01:36:46,980 --> 01:36:50,660
Slatens Reliability is relatively similar to the rest of the region,

1064
01:36:50,800 --> 01:36:52,880
which is not that different from the rest of the state.

1065
01:36:53,120 --> 01:36:55,440
Some years it's up, some years it's down.

1066
01:36:56,100 --> 01:36:58,760
I also want to make clear as we put into the record,

1067
01:36:59,440 --> 01:37:03,440
when Slatens brought their concerns about reliability to us, we responded.

1068
01:37:04,220 --> 01:37:08,460
We have replaced thousands of feet of distribution line in the city in the last four years.

1069
01:37:08,900 --> 01:37:11,200
We have replaced hundreds of distribution poles.

1070
01:37:11,200 --> 01:37:16,240
We have spent tens of millions of dollars to rebuild the transmission system in the Slayton region.

1071
01:37:17,100 --> 01:37:20,680
That's an example of us being responsive to the needs of our customers.

1072
01:37:21,300 --> 01:37:26,900
I understand Slayton's frustration and the genesis of it like we get that.

1073
01:37:27,240 --> 01:37:33,560
But we have taken significant actions and made significant investments to make reliability and Slayton better.

1074
01:37:34,480 --> 01:37:36,600
And I don't want that to go on a dress here.

1075
01:37:36,600 --> 01:37:41,620
And we'll get let the city respond and then get to commissioner Ham's question.

1076
01:37:42,340 --> 01:37:53,620
Very quickly, and my council wants to respond to the improvements just so happened to coincide with the filing of the contested case hearing and not really any moment before that.

1077
01:37:53,940 --> 01:37:57,240
Which was about a year and a half or two years.

1078
01:37:58,600 --> 01:38:02,840
And sir, say your name and your welcome to respond to.

1079
01:38:05,590 --> 01:38:08,390
No, it's a different type of dot.

1080
01:38:12,860 --> 01:38:17,180
Hi, my name is Blake Ronmus, I'm on the Slating City Council.

1081
01:38:17,320 --> 01:38:19,300
Thank you all for your time.

1082
01:38:21,860 --> 01:38:27,360
Mr. Sullivan, I feel the exact feeling that you are.

1083
01:38:27,480 --> 01:38:30,420
I'm super annoyed here.

1084
01:38:31,160 --> 01:38:32,900
All along this entire process.

1085
01:38:33,300 --> 01:38:36,640
These are the kind of things that Excel has been bringing up to basically

1086
01:38:36,640 --> 01:38:43,460
money the waters and try and make this not happen. If they, I believe, if they truly

1087
01:38:43,460 --> 01:38:49,980
thought that these were issues, they would have had brought them forth by now. They've

1088
01:38:49,980 --> 01:38:55,320
had plenty of time to do so. I think they're just bringing them up to further

1089
01:38:55,320 --> 01:38:59,760
money the waters and try and make this not happen. As far as the community

1090
01:38:59,760 --> 01:39:04,820
solar gardens, now anybody can correct me if I'm wrong here, at one point in time the

1091
01:39:04,820 --> 01:39:10,240
The community solar gardens needed to be right adjacent to the community they were serving.

1092
01:39:11,000 --> 01:39:12,720
And that's no longer the case, correct?

1093
01:39:14,200 --> 01:39:18,500
So those community solar gardens, that are in slightly, in a sense,

1094
01:39:18,600 --> 01:39:25,100
could be resold to or subscribe to a subscriber right here in the Twin Cities.

1095
01:39:26,500 --> 01:39:35,200
from what I'm personally seeing with the people trying to get subscribers signed up.

1096
01:39:35,220 --> 01:39:36,320
They're knocking down the doors.

1097
01:39:36,580 --> 01:39:45,580
I honestly don't think they can build the community solar gardens as fast as they're getting people to subscribe to them.

1098
01:39:46,140 --> 01:39:55,080
So I personally don't think it would be an issue if the slight and subscribers left because there's plenty of opportunity for them to go elsewhere.

1099
01:39:55,080 --> 01:39:59,960
I think the developers would just re-

1100
01:40:00,000 --> 01:40:08,000
Resell those subscriptions. I also think that's, I mean, they're just using this as another excuse to muddy the waters. That's my opinion.

1101
01:40:09,920 --> 01:40:13,000
But it makes real good sense to me. Thank you.

1102
01:40:13,720 --> 01:40:15,760
Thank you. Commissioner Hum.

1103
01:40:16,500 --> 01:40:20,420
Thank you, Chair Steven. So I'll just turn this discussion a little bit in different directions.

1104
01:40:20,600 --> 01:40:25,120
I think a city mentioned that not only the service quality data concern with the rates.

1105
01:40:25,120 --> 01:40:32,320
So I want to give you the facts you need to consider if you are really worried about the rates.

1106
01:40:33,140 --> 01:40:39,920
Because based on deal what I see here you are going to have only flexibility with the generation portion.

1107
01:40:40,540 --> 01:40:46,480
You are going to take a transmission service from Excel because you are located within the Excel service area.

1108
01:40:47,640 --> 01:40:50,820
In the wholesale weights, you are neutral.

1109
01:40:51,960 --> 01:40:57,760
However, in the Excel retail rates, Excel suppose two, credit,

1110
01:40:58,000 --> 01:41:00,260
rate pairs with a certain credit.

1111
01:41:01,420 --> 01:41:04,680
That's not going to be your credit anymore, if you get out.

1112
01:41:05,040 --> 01:41:06,540
So you have to put that in the condition.

1113
01:41:08,680 --> 01:41:13,760
And then, generation side, these days, there's no such thing as access capacity.

1114
01:41:14,480 --> 01:41:22,200
That means you have to buy brand new capacity most likely, which will be very, very expensive these days.

1115
01:41:23,460 --> 01:41:31,920
As of now, Excel energy, I know you are not happy with their rates, but at least in the generation portion, they average out all their flip.

1116
01:41:32,600 --> 01:41:36,960
They charge you average price, not the most expensive rates.

1117
01:41:37,760 --> 01:41:44,840
So, all these things being included, just simply comparing Norbert's co-ops rates with

1118
01:41:44,840 --> 01:41:50,600
Excel's rate, will not translate into your own system after you create your own system.

1119
01:41:51,020 --> 01:41:56,300
Because Norbert's account, co-op, has a WAPA allocation, you're not going to get that.

1120
01:41:56,860 --> 01:41:59,680
Also GRE has a very favorable financing.

1121
01:41:59,900 --> 01:42:06,500
If they are properly doing the retail credit for their transfer heli system, your rates will

1122
01:42:06,500 --> 01:42:13,780
get that because you are going to pay Excel their full wholesale rate without retail credit.

1123
01:42:15,000 --> 01:42:21,260
So that's why I hope you take all those into account when you are making your final decision,

1124
01:42:22,460 --> 01:42:28,760
because simply comparing noble school price with the Excel price will not come to your benefit.

1125
01:42:28,760 --> 01:42:37,080
My biggest concern is, I don't know what is the actual number of people taking Excel affordability

1126
01:42:37,880 --> 01:42:39,700
program in your community.

1127
01:42:40,820 --> 01:42:43,120
You are not going to get that program from Excel.

1128
01:42:43,140 --> 01:42:46,960
You have to create your own affordability program to help those people.

1129
01:42:47,920 --> 01:42:53,340
So I hope that you have a good plan to help those people who need to help and then create

1130
01:42:53,340 --> 01:42:55,420
that program when you are initiating this.

1131
01:43:04,600 --> 01:43:16,780
Thank you, Commissioner Ham, your rate questions are legitimate relative to rates, and until I am a rate guy, that's what I do for a living primarily is rates.

1132
01:43:17,680 --> 01:43:29,140
And one of the things when you sort of talk about affordability for the city and while the CSG discussion has been interesting, quite frankly, it's not the elephant in the room.

1133
01:43:29,140 --> 01:43:34,920
And when we talk about affordability for the city to do this, it's really been, it's really about the mill rate.

1134
01:43:35,700 --> 01:43:41,860
And I think from the city's perspective, the fact that we haven't discussed that at all, is interesting.

1135
01:43:42,820 --> 01:43:47,440
In that, you know, the 100, well, just brought to 117 mills.

1136
01:43:47,700 --> 01:43:49,820
And I know precedence is important to the commission.

1137
01:43:50,520 --> 01:43:55,040
It's like four times higher than anything the commission has ever approved before.

1138
01:43:55,040 --> 01:44:05,440
And there are specific items within Excel's analysis, which are in going opposition to precedence.

1139
01:44:05,960 --> 01:44:14,980
You mentioned the generation issue, the generation issue and relative to the Rochester 498 case with people's co-op, which actually I was a part of that case.

1140
01:44:16,120 --> 01:44:24,960
There are avoidance distribution costs, which actually has a math there, and dominimizes that number to almost zero.

1141
01:44:26,660 --> 01:44:34,920
Their view around what they might be able to say from a customer service perspective, which they negated to almost nothing.

1142
01:44:35,420 --> 01:44:41,900
The idea that the city should pay for all of the substation, even though the city only utilizes a portion of the substation.

1143
01:44:41,900 --> 01:44:45,880
I think each of those items is incredibly important,

1144
01:44:46,100 --> 01:44:49,820
and not only for this case, but for the precedent that's set for future cases.

1145
01:44:51,440 --> 01:44:55,920
I can guarantee you that at 117 mils per kilowatt hour, there will never be another acquisition

1146
01:44:55,920 --> 01:44:59,260
of a single customer in this state under any circumstances.

1147
01:45:00,000 --> 01:45:13,840
Because that's literally equal to the retail rate. If you look at Excel's testimony, their year one loss of revenue is greater than their year one revenues.

1148
01:45:15,200 --> 01:45:25,080
So basically what they're arguing is not only won't we save money by not serving Slayton, we will actually cost us even more money for not serving Slayton.

1149
01:45:25,080 --> 01:45:38,840
And the city feels like through the process that the detailed analysis that we submitted within our testimony has largely been ignored and not even commented on.

1150
01:45:39,800 --> 01:45:48,980
And we think that it's not only important for this case, but for future cases that there's a vigorous discussion at this level about some of these items.

1151
01:45:49,600 --> 01:45:51,460
I'll leave it at that for now.

1152
01:46:01,640 --> 01:46:02,360
Mr. Barlow.

1153
01:46:04,960 --> 01:46:11,700
I don't want to respond to all of that, but I do want to respond to something that was just said about the first year lost revenues.

1154
01:46:12,040 --> 01:46:13,260
That's simply not the case.

1155
01:46:14,600 --> 01:46:22,560
Our math shows that the first year that's lately's the system we will lose about 3.03 million dollars in revenues.

1156
01:46:23,360 --> 01:46:27,140
Our methodology treats 2.1 million of that as lost.

1157
01:46:27,140 --> 01:46:32,280
that is obviously not higher than the amount of revenues we would have received. I just

1158
01:46:32,280 --> 01:46:34,460
felt that it was important to get that clear on the record.

1159
01:46:38,350 --> 01:46:42,610
So we'll take a break, but I'm sorry.

1160
01:46:43,330 --> 01:46:46,090
Could I just respond to that before we take a break just simply?

1161
01:46:47,690 --> 01:46:49,150
I can point to their testimony.

1162
01:46:49,870 --> 01:46:52,970
Were there year one loss of revenue payment according to their witness,

1163
01:46:52,970 --> 01:46:58,450
Ms. Peterson is $3,153,000 and $21.

1164
01:46:59,570 --> 01:47:03,090
And the revenue is $3,054,023.

1165
01:47:03,530 --> 01:47:05,870
So actually, their first year in their testimony

1166
01:47:05,870 --> 01:47:09,510
in her survey buttle testimony is greater than the revenue.

1167
01:47:09,770 --> 01:47:14,590
So for the city of Slayton, if we adopted just to be clear,

1168
01:47:14,810 --> 01:47:17,430
if we adopted what the Department of Commerce

1169
01:47:17,430 --> 01:47:26,490
overall advises that we do that we adopt that ALJ report would this city be moved forward

1170
01:47:26,490 --> 01:47:27,730
with the acquisition?

1171
01:47:30,100 --> 01:47:39,020
The ALJ being 10 years at 116.79 mills and 4.0 points.

1172
01:47:39,120 --> 01:47:39,240
Yeah.

1173
01:47:39,720 --> 01:47:40,860
That's in the record.

1174
01:47:41,280 --> 01:47:47,860
That's what we're having a little trouble like why we're going back and forth so much

1175
01:47:47,860 --> 01:47:57,820
because there is an ALJ report here that and the department is saying adopt the ALJ report

1176
01:47:57,820 --> 01:48:05,500
just to be clear and just to be clear the city is saying that that doesn't work for the city.

1177
01:48:06,340 --> 01:48:11,420
I would echo your frustrations, Madam Chair, and while we're going back and forth on all these

1178
01:48:11,420 --> 01:48:16,900
different things when to use the phrase elephant in the room is very accurate and yes, the

1179
01:48:16,900 --> 01:48:19,940
116.79 is the middle-degree.

1180
01:48:20,140 --> 01:48:20,880
It's the problem.

1181
01:48:22,700 --> 01:48:24,980
40 mils is okay.

1182
01:48:25,040 --> 01:48:26,480
We're not able to have more usual.

1183
01:48:26,580 --> 01:48:32,020
We're not going to negotiate between parties right now.

1184
01:48:32,260 --> 01:48:41,240
I just wanted to try to clarify where the different advice to the commission is coming from.

1185
01:48:41,240 --> 01:48:44,880
And before we take a break for the department,

1186
01:48:45,560 --> 01:48:48,580
I didn't mean to kind of leave you out of this argument,

1187
01:48:48,600 --> 01:48:50,820
but is there, or this dispute?

1188
01:48:50,900 --> 01:48:54,760
Is there anything that was said earlier that you want to correct?

1189
01:48:55,080 --> 01:49:01,180
I know that the department takes complaints from consumers about CSG,

1190
01:49:01,300 --> 01:49:06,340
so I'm sure you will be happy to help if that is the result here.

1191
01:49:07,060 --> 01:49:10,980
But anything else you wanted to add about what you've heard

1192
01:49:10,980 --> 01:49:13,060
this morning before we take a break.

1193
01:49:13,560 --> 01:49:14,840
Sure, thanks, Chair Seabin.

1194
01:49:16,200 --> 01:49:19,460
We spent a lot of time talking about the CSGs.

1195
01:49:19,460 --> 01:49:24,960
I just wanted to point out that there's only 2.5 megawatts of CSGs

1196
01:49:27,100 --> 01:49:33,140
connected to the slate and West Substations, which is a great deal.

1197
01:49:33,140 --> 01:49:43,320
In our testimony, we did provide that and the ALJ report affirm this that Excel shouldn't

1198
01:49:43,320 --> 01:49:48,320
be allowed to recover integration expenses related to CSGs, but as the conversation

1199
01:49:48,320 --> 01:49:50,220
evolved this morning,

1200
01:49:53,400 --> 01:49:57,100
the Department would be fine with assessing engineering studies and

1201
01:49:57,100 --> 01:49:59,960
transmission studies that are particularly real.

1202
01:50:00,000 --> 01:50:07,340
I'm delighted to that slate and west substation and appreciate Commissioner Partridge's clarification.

1203
01:50:08,700 --> 01:50:13,860
Sorry, I didn't track that. You'd be fine attributing the engineering cost to which party?

1204
01:50:14,140 --> 01:50:29,400
To assessing the outcome of those studies and then at that time seeing which party would be responsible in a line with what Commissioner Partridge had provided at the outset.

1205
01:50:29,400 --> 01:50:33,200
So, what would Commissioner Partridge please?

1206
01:50:34,880 --> 01:50:36,240
Thank you, Chair Seabin.

1207
01:50:36,440 --> 01:50:47,400
I think after the break, it may be helpful if Ms. Campbell could maybe provide some of her insight on the mill rate.

1208
01:50:48,560 --> 01:50:56,380
And, you know, how the department arrived at that being and appropriate amount if she's willing.

1209
01:50:56,380 --> 01:51:02,260
Yeah, chair Stephen commissioner partridge. We can bring up a department witness for that. Sure. Okay. Thank you

1210
01:51:02,260 --> 01:51:06,460
Okay, the commission is going to stand and recess until one o'clock

1211
01:51:07,800 --> 01:51:12,440
So we'll be back at one o'clock. Thank you

1212
03:01:51,820 --> 03:02:02,780
The commissioner will come back from its recess, and while we turn to commissioner partridge, if commissioner partridge, you wanted to start with whatever you wanted.

1213
03:02:03,120 --> 03:02:19,700
Yes, thank you, Chair Steven. I was hoping to hear from Ms. Campbell from the Department of Commerce on her thoughts and her process in revealing the proposed mill rate that is included in the LG's report as her recommendation for us.

1214
03:02:26,580 --> 03:02:30,100
Miss Campbell, welcome. When you're ready, please state your name for the record.

1215
03:02:35,660 --> 03:02:38,540
Good afternoon, Nancy Campbell, for the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

1216
03:02:48,290 --> 03:02:51,370
Nancy Campbell, for the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

1217
03:02:51,530 --> 03:02:52,450
You're a catch-up.

1218
03:02:52,830 --> 03:02:53,610
Oh, I'll do that.

1219
03:02:53,890 --> 03:02:55,050
Oh, yeah.

1220
03:02:58,090 --> 03:03:01,630
We are getting new microphones, but not until September.

1221
03:03:03,330 --> 03:03:05,730
We've only been saying that for like two years.

1222
03:03:05,730 --> 03:03:07,290
You asked the table.

1223
03:03:09,850 --> 03:03:11,190
Please, for not green anymore.

1224
03:03:19,330 --> 03:03:19,630
Sorry.

1225
03:03:19,710 --> 03:03:20,690
I'm causing problems.

1226
03:03:21,410 --> 03:03:21,870
It's not you.

1227
03:03:22,030 --> 03:03:23,810
I'm going to the Senate Department of Commerce.

1228
03:03:26,750 --> 03:03:30,730
I'll have to be happy to take a stab at the question that I was asked.

1229
03:03:31,710 --> 03:03:32,210
The Department.

1230
03:03:32,930 --> 03:03:38,090
I mean, generally, I think the short answer is the Department things that you should adopt

1231
03:03:38,090 --> 03:03:41,490
the administrative lodge judge decision option one.

1232
03:03:41,490 --> 03:03:50,830
and some kind of revised 10A and I would probably make a change to the 10A that we

1233
03:03:50,830 --> 03:03:57,430
saw modified by Tuma to get rid of the solar part at the sub station part and

1234
03:03:57,430 --> 03:04:01,690
maybe split the engineering study costs. I think that made a lot of sense. I think

1235
03:04:01,690 --> 03:04:05,550
that was Commissioner Tuma that recommended that. Getting into the specifics.

1236
03:04:10,750 --> 03:04:11,210
The

1237
03:04:11,210 --> 03:04:18,210
what's fair. Our position was somewhere between the parties, the city of Slayton wanted

1238
03:04:18,210 --> 03:04:24,730
five years for the last revenues. Excel wanted 20 years. The Department recommended 10 years.

1239
03:04:24,990 --> 03:04:28,970
We had two case presidents where the commissions already decided that. The administrative

1240
03:04:28,970 --> 03:04:34,710
law judge agreed with us on that. I think the stranded costs is the thing that was like

1241
03:04:34,710 --> 03:04:42,950
a little bit different, the administrative law judge took a pretty strict reading, and he also,

1242
03:04:42,950 --> 03:04:49,650
ALG also seemed to rely on the Commission's past precedent about saying that it had to be

1243
03:04:49,650 --> 03:04:55,410
actual avoided costs that would be shed due to the loss of the customer, and that the

1244
03:04:55,410 --> 03:04:59,970
avoided cost must be actual, clear and demonstrable, and that's why I think.

1245
03:05:00,000 --> 03:05:27,600
The ALJ went more with, more with excels approach, and excels approach was 30.72% of the costs were avoidable, and 69.28% were not avoidable for the stranded costs, whereas city of Slayton had about 2.8% of the costs being, our 97.2% being avoidable, and 2.8% actually being stranded.

1246
03:05:28,740 --> 03:05:36,580
So, anyway, the Department's position is kind of in the middle of these two, which to me suggested probably is a reasonable outcome.

1247
03:05:37,280 --> 03:05:42,640
They've been a straight-of-law judge agreed with us and applied past the past two commission orders.

1248
03:05:43,020 --> 03:05:48,260
And that's why we think decision-option one agreeing with the ALJ report makes the most sense.

1249
03:05:49,100 --> 03:05:54,360
I think we're spending a lot of time on some issues that I don't think are that big of a deal for the engineering study.

1250
03:05:54,360 --> 03:05:58,080
you heard that, you know, they're going to still have a load.

1251
03:05:58,300 --> 03:06:01,360
It's just a quarter of a mile down on the transmission line

1252
03:06:01,360 --> 03:06:02,700
or something to that extent.

1253
03:06:02,740 --> 03:06:04,720
It doesn't seem like that's going to be a big deal.

1254
03:06:05,020 --> 03:06:07,340
So I don't think we should spend a lot of time on it.

1255
03:06:07,980 --> 03:06:11,380
But that's why I think Roy's 10A would take care of that.

1256
03:06:12,100 --> 03:06:14,980
And then for this CSG, for what it's worth,

1257
03:06:15,940 --> 03:06:18,980
we think that should be a developed or operator issue.

1258
03:06:19,640 --> 03:06:21,960
And we don't think that needs to be addressed here.

1259
03:06:23,400 --> 03:06:29,720
Thank you, Ms. Campbell. I appreciate that, and I appreciate your review for the city.

1260
03:06:29,860 --> 03:06:36,200
I know you don't appear before us very often, but I think one thing I'll say of Ms. Campbell's

1261
03:06:36,200 --> 03:06:40,960
review is that if she has looked at it and signed off on it, I know there is never a rubber stamp,

1262
03:06:41,320 --> 03:06:46,800
and I very much rely on her expertise in advice in these situations.

1263
03:06:46,800 --> 03:06:55,120
I did over lunch, put together some modified language, building off of Commissioner Tuma's,

1264
03:06:55,280 --> 03:06:58,720
modified Commissioner, whatever iteration it was.

1265
03:06:59,480 --> 03:07:05,600
So here's the version 8.0 or whatever it is of this decision option.

1266
03:07:05,880 --> 03:07:09,460
And I think that Alliance with what Miss Kimball has just said.

1267
03:07:10,420 --> 03:07:14,340
It doesn't specifically state that the engineering study cost should be split.

1268
03:07:14,340 --> 03:07:32,340
It would leave that up for a compliance filing, but I'm open to adding that just I can give you all a couple minutes to read over it and can you just talk us through what the stuff is to like the new language on

1269
03:07:32,340 --> 03:07:48,620
It's late in West substation. Yes. So the idea here would be that I would put forward essentially the proposal in my new decision options filed on the 19th which would be to accept the report with modifications.

1270
03:07:51,600 --> 03:08:07,260
The main modification here is that first it would allow for our decision today for the city to take that back to make a decision at the council level or wherever you would need to have this conversation to decide if you wanted to move forward.

1271
03:08:07,940 --> 03:08:11,960
understanding what the just compensation formula would look like.

1272
03:08:13,980 --> 03:08:18,080
You could let us know how many days you would need for that, or if you needed months.

1273
03:08:18,360 --> 03:08:24,920
I don't know, but let us know after we've made our decision, how long you need to contemplate your next steps.

1274
03:08:25,820 --> 03:08:30,440
We would write that in, and then the city would notify Excel of whether they wanted to move forward.

1275
03:08:30,440 --> 03:08:39,140
At that point, Excel would need to initiate the study of the Slayton West substation and then

1276
03:08:39,140 --> 03:08:46,540
provide us a compliance filing, showing what costs are unavoidable, associated on caused by

1277
03:08:46,540 --> 03:08:53,840
the Slayton transfer and pruningly incurred as part of the just compensation for the transfer.

1278
03:08:54,500 --> 03:08:59,100
Put that into a compliance filing and it would allow for parties to weigh in.

1279
03:08:59,100 --> 03:09:06,120
I would, again, ask that the department would be willing to review that when it comes in and

1280
03:09:06,120 --> 03:09:15,040
provide their feedback if you need additional time, you know, 10 days is not necessarily

1281
03:09:15,040 --> 03:09:22,460
necessary for my perspective, so like for you all to weigh in on that city as well would be

1282
03:09:22,460 --> 03:09:27,020
asked to weigh in, so if you need more than 10 days, I can completely understand that.

1283
03:09:28,330 --> 03:09:34,790
And that would allow for those additional study costs in any potential upgrades to that

1284
03:09:34,790 --> 03:09:39,930
substation caused by the transfer to be contemplated as part of just compensation.

1285
03:09:42,550 --> 03:09:46,990
Then the other decision options I have would be in just to be clear.

1286
03:09:47,430 --> 03:09:50,490
I want to know where we're working off the staff compiled decision options.

1287
03:09:50,530 --> 03:09:53,850
So the numbering is different from what was in their original briefing papers.

1288
03:09:53,850 --> 03:09:57,070
I just had a minor panic a minute to go about that.

1289
03:09:57,450 --> 03:09:59,110
It would be 11.

1290
03:10:01,140 --> 03:10:12,020
Which is just a slight modification of a statement within the ALJ report about exalt, waving its rights.

1291
03:10:13,320 --> 03:10:25,540
My new 14 is filed on the 19th, which is related to the burden of proof. Again, doesn't change any of the calculation of just compensation.

1292
03:10:25,540 --> 03:10:33,740
and just modifying a finding within the ALJ report, and then determining that the city, sorry,

1293
03:10:34,160 --> 03:10:39,960
hydrogen of 15, which determines that the city complied with requirements of the statute.

1294
03:10:45,540 --> 03:10:50,160
And that would be my proposal to move forward.

1295
03:10:51,980 --> 03:11:18,400
One minor suggestion on your 10, I don't know if land if you can get it back up and as I was thinking through this trying to imagine that I think that where if this city chooses to continue to pursue the transfer I don't think I don't want there to be an indication that they must make their final choice at this at this stage the final choice would be after we give the final price.

1296
03:11:18,400 --> 03:11:23,500
Yes, so is that okay with you? Okay, good. I think that's what I was trying to get to and I didn't

1297
03:11:23,500 --> 03:11:26,580
clearly state it when I put my decision option together.

1298
03:11:31,170 --> 03:11:34,210
And commissioners might need a break to

1299
03:11:34,210 --> 03:11:41,900
consult with staff because we didn't we didn't see this at before commissioner

1300
03:11:41,900 --> 03:11:47,700
I'm going to share a picture just to explain it, but thoughts from the parties on commissioner

1301
03:11:47,700 --> 03:11:48,920
and partages,

1302
03:11:50,960 --> 03:11:58,040
new language here, or her overall motion, and we'll start with the city of

1303
03:11:58,040 --> 03:11:58,240
Slain.

1304
03:11:59,240 --> 03:12:03,900
Oh, and Mr. Weaver answers specifically to the framing of the question. I just have a question.

1305
03:12:05,580 --> 03:12:10,600
Ms. Campbell's number that she's referring to is the 116.79 correct.

1306
03:12:11,240 --> 03:12:14,600
And the report, that's DLCs and ALJs.

1307
03:12:16,160 --> 03:12:16,220
Yes.

1308
03:12:16,920 --> 03:12:17,760
There's even, yes.

1309
03:12:18,500 --> 03:12:23,080
I shouldn't actually probably speak for Ms. Campbell, but yes, she's not in it.

1310
03:12:23,780 --> 03:12:23,800
It is.

1311
03:12:23,840 --> 03:12:25,660
The number included in the ALJ report.

1312
03:12:25,900 --> 03:12:28,180
And then that four point whatever million for the acquisition.

1313
03:12:28,840 --> 03:12:28,980
Yes.

1314
03:12:30,120 --> 03:12:33,360
And that would be part of commissioner and partages overall motion.

1315
03:12:33,960 --> 03:12:34,020
Yes.

1316
03:12:34,280 --> 03:12:35,200
Yeah, to clarify.

1317
03:12:36,160 --> 03:12:45,040
The motion would be to accept the ALJ's recommendation only with the modification of the 10A.

1318
03:12:45,400 --> 03:12:50,100
And then those clarifications on certain legal statements within the document.

1319
03:12:50,840 --> 03:12:54,760
I'm sure the other Josh has something to say about this question.

1320
03:12:54,760 --> 03:13:01,360
I just would say prior to lunch, it seemed like we were finally heading into some in-depth

1321
03:13:01,360 --> 03:13:09,200
discussion of what's in that 116.79 millerate, and I really hope that we get to get into

1322
03:13:09,200 --> 03:13:13,560
that before any motions hit the table, I guess, my comment.

1323
03:13:15,000 --> 03:13:21,120
Is the city want to make an overall statement about the remainder of Commissioner of

1324
03:13:21,120 --> 03:13:24,020
should just propose here, proposal?

1325
03:13:25,200 --> 03:13:25,520
Thank you.

1326
03:13:25,700 --> 03:13:26,920
Chairman, Commissioner Parchridge.

1327
03:13:27,040 --> 03:13:33,000
I guess with respect to the overall context of it, I mean, let's just start with an arrow

1328
03:13:33,000 --> 03:13:33,620
issue first.

1329
03:13:33,800 --> 03:13:39,300
I would say that the city would not be strongly opposed to the kind of Parchridge alternative

1330
03:13:39,300 --> 03:13:47,260
10A, I think that that would be a relatively doable way to do it.

1331
03:13:47,260 --> 03:13:52,800
What would be the date number of days you need for that blank?

1332
03:13:52,820 --> 03:13:55,360
Can the first blank in ten A?

1333
03:13:56,700 --> 03:13:57,220
Thank you.

1334
03:13:57,540 --> 03:14:02,700
Commissioner Steven, I guess I would say that it kind of depends on the rest of the motion

1335
03:14:02,700 --> 03:14:06,640
if it's going to be a hundred and six-day in-mills.

1336
03:14:07,440 --> 03:14:10,820
Sorry, maybe we're not being clear as a commission.

1337
03:14:11,160 --> 03:14:13,900
I think that or as a where we're at,

1338
03:14:13,900 --> 03:14:26,920
What I was trying to ask is, or get Commissioner Partridge to articulate is, or what she did articulate is how she would modify new alternative 10A.

1339
03:14:27,580 --> 03:14:38,160
But that's just one piece of what would be our overall decision, which Commissioner Partridge is saying, her overall motion, we still need to vote on.

1340
03:14:38,160 --> 03:14:45,220
and we want to hear from you what you think is if we adapted what she said like most of the

1341
03:14:45,220 --> 03:14:54,120
ALJ report with the few exceptions that are outlined here. So the ALJ report again contains

1342
03:14:54,120 --> 03:14:59,960
the lump sum initial payment that mill rate for 10 years and the other findings of

1343
03:15:00,000 --> 03:15:07,560
The A.L.J. report. If that helps, what I'm trying to get is like, so if we, if the commission

1344
03:15:07,560 --> 03:15:15,800
move forward with that, then that would be our overall order that would come out. And I think

1345
03:15:15,800 --> 03:15:24,860
what my question here then is her new language says within blank days from today. The city,

1346
03:15:24,860 --> 03:15:31,680
well you will tell Excel whether or not you want to move forward with the transfer and so how many days

1347
03:15:31,680 --> 03:15:38,300
do you think if that's if all of that happened so how many days from today do you need to go consult

1348
03:15:38,300 --> 03:15:44,860
with the city about now that you know what the terms would be more or less you know whether you want to

1349
03:15:44,860 --> 03:15:51,000
move forward with the transfer. Thank you, Jersey. I think that's pretty straightforward. Then I mean

1350
03:15:51,000 --> 03:15:59,440
the city is Mr. Milchau indicated, 116 mills is not pencil out for the city and so that's I mean we

1351
03:15:59,440 --> 03:16:05,840
think you don't care how many days we could tell us now in our five seconds. Yeah it would

1352
03:16:05,840 --> 03:16:12,320
30 days would be more than adequate that 116 mills would be close to effectively double in rates

1353
03:16:12,320 --> 03:16:16,880
for people in slayton and would not be something that the city would be like late to pursue.

1354
03:16:16,880 --> 03:16:31,900
Yeah, no, I understand that I think I'm just trying to like the commission may be ready to make a decision and if we're saying these are the other decision options we're adopting that will result in an order that will

1355
03:16:32,920 --> 03:16:41,160
You know that you may not be happy with what we're deciding on those other factors so that that's fair

1356
03:16:41,160 --> 03:16:42,980
So, thank you.

1357
03:16:43,140 --> 03:16:43,360
Sure, Steven.

1358
03:16:43,760 --> 03:16:44,340
I would put it.

1359
03:16:44,500 --> 03:16:45,620
There's kind of three categories, right?

1360
03:16:45,660 --> 03:16:51,060
One is the 116 mills and things in that range where it would be an obvious, no, for

1361
03:16:51,060 --> 03:16:51,800
the city.

1362
03:16:52,440 --> 03:16:59,100
If it was 4.2 mills and something closer to our range, I think maybe 60 days would be adequate.

1363
03:16:59,620 --> 03:17:03,060
If it's somewhere in the middle, in between those two things, I think it's a closer call for the

1364
03:17:03,060 --> 03:17:07,600
question and it would probably require maybe some more public engagement at the city level.

1365
03:17:07,600 --> 03:17:10,460
And so I think if it, if we come down something in that range,

1366
03:17:10,960 --> 03:17:12,640
I would respectfully request more time.

1367
03:17:13,740 --> 03:17:16,420
And so I see some more of a template we're trying to do.

1368
03:17:16,980 --> 03:17:17,320
It's 120 days.

1369
03:17:17,620 --> 03:17:18,800
I think it would be adequate.

1370
03:17:19,640 --> 03:17:20,740
I appreciate that.

1371
03:17:21,360 --> 03:17:26,080
And did we hear from the department on commissioner,

1372
03:17:26,280 --> 03:17:34,720
partages overall framing of the, of a path forward here,

1373
03:17:34,720 --> 03:17:40,920
I think from what I heard, it's largely department earlier was supportive of moving forward

1374
03:17:40,920 --> 03:17:46,960
with the ALJ report and most of the provisions in it, so any other comments on this

1375
03:17:46,960 --> 03:17:47,860
on this other language?

1376
03:17:48,900 --> 03:17:49,440
Sure, Stephen.

1377
03:17:50,360 --> 03:17:57,880
The department's fine with Alternative 10A, that's posted on the screen, as far as the burden

1378
03:17:57,880 --> 03:18:12,620
of proof and accelerating its challenge, we would maintain that the ALJ has those positions.

1379
03:18:12,860 --> 03:18:17,340
We would continue to support the ALJ's articulation of those.

1380
03:18:18,440 --> 03:18:22,940
So does that mean are you okay with Partridge New 14 and 15?

1381
03:18:24,220 --> 03:18:26,720
Is that what that was talking about?

1382
03:18:26,720 --> 03:18:31,180
The Department wouldn't be supporting Partridge New 14.

1383
03:18:32,100 --> 03:18:33,180
And tell me why?

1384
03:18:33,940 --> 03:18:39,260
Because the Department continues to support the way the ALJ articulated the burden of proof.

1385
03:18:40,060 --> 03:18:42,920
Okay, as it relates to that statute there.

1386
03:18:43,780 --> 03:18:44,000
Okay.

1387
03:18:44,600 --> 03:18:52,320
And if we want to, if Commissioner Partridge wants to ask more questions about that,

1388
03:18:52,320 --> 03:19:01,280
or if you have more specificity to what particular fine means, it is that it might be helpful

1389
03:19:01,280 --> 03:19:09,060
for me when I am looking this over when we can come back to that or Commissioner of

1390
03:19:09,060 --> 03:19:10,400
Partridge if you wanted to.

1391
03:19:11,420 --> 03:19:18,720
So, full disclosure that we of course have our own legal team that helps advise us on these.

1392
03:19:18,720 --> 03:19:30,620
And, as I understand it, the new 14 does not modify any of the recommendations, the compensation, or the ultimate transfer.

1393
03:19:32,740 --> 03:19:36,620
It's simply a interpretation of the law.

1394
03:19:37,080 --> 03:19:45,120
So does that mean that you don't support the overall approach, or that you just don't necessarily agree on that particular issue,

1395
03:19:45,540 --> 03:19:47,720
or that you haven't analyzed it very much.

1396
03:19:47,720 --> 03:19:51,440
Sure, Steven, Commissioner Partridge. I think the latter.

1397
03:19:52,760 --> 03:19:54,360
Just something you haven't looked into.

1398
03:19:54,880 --> 03:19:55,940
Yep. Okay.

1399
03:19:56,320 --> 03:19:57,940
But overall would support your...

1400
03:19:57,940 --> 03:19:59,180
Okay, that's helpful.

1401
03:20:00,000 --> 03:20:29,980
Similarly with the move 15, this just shows states that the city has latent complied with the requirements of the statute to bring the issue of just compensation forward, and that the commission, essentially, we don't have to make a determination of whether, or we are not allowed by law to really consider whether they're going to contract with a third party to help support them.

1402
03:20:30,000 --> 03:20:38,220
maintaining their utility. Again, this doesn't change the ultimate outcome or compensation

1403
03:20:38,740 --> 03:20:44,540
for the transfer is more of a statement of law that clarifies something within the report.

1404
03:20:45,020 --> 03:20:50,100
Is this something that would give you concern about the overall package or just

1405
03:20:51,160 --> 03:20:53,160
to disagree or have not analyzed?

1406
03:20:53,160 --> 03:20:59,740
And Chair Sivan, Commissioner Partridge, as it pertains to decision option 15, the department

1407
03:20:59,740 --> 03:21:06,120
doesn't have a strong stance on that, so it doesn't change our position on the overall

1408
03:21:06,120 --> 03:21:06,520
package.

1409
03:21:07,100 --> 03:21:09,060
Okay, that's very helpful for me.

1410
03:21:09,100 --> 03:21:17,260
So 14 and 15, it sounds like it's just like our attorneys, when or in you Commissioner

1411
03:21:17,260 --> 03:21:24,720
Partridge when you looked at new 14 and new 15. It's just a different way of stating the burden of proof that

1412
03:21:25,260 --> 03:21:32,460
That is that right yet essentially like it's saying the same thing as the LJ said for the outcome

1413
03:21:32,460 --> 03:21:38,000
It's just a slight modification around the which party has the burden of proof

1414
03:21:38,000 --> 03:21:42,440
Right to determine perhaps I might be using this wrong

1415
03:21:42,440 --> 03:21:45,540
But I think Mr. Dornfeld would call it Dicta

1416
03:21:47,260 --> 03:21:49,060
Is that right?

1417
03:21:49,400 --> 03:21:50,060
Maybe that.

1418
03:21:50,940 --> 03:21:51,180
Okay.

1419
03:21:52,020 --> 03:21:58,300
It's part of the overall package, but not really all that relevant to the practicality of this.

1420
03:21:59,840 --> 03:22:08,500
And commissioners, if you want to talk with our attorneys about this, we can take a break for that to happen too.

1421
03:22:10,560 --> 03:22:14,940
I'm sorry you wanted to comment on partridge, new 14 or new 15.

1422
03:22:14,940 --> 03:22:22,060
I did. Thank you, Chair Savin, Commissioner Percher. I disagree. I do believe the burden of proof is important in this case.

1423
03:22:22,700 --> 03:22:29,980
I would zoom out to the fact that again, neither party had any slate and specific cost data

1424
03:22:29,980 --> 03:22:32,140
informing any of the numbers here.

1425
03:22:32,660 --> 03:22:41,260
And so it's critical that we consider the lack of that kind of affirmative evidence that the burden of proof is

1426
03:22:41,260 --> 03:22:44,420
has been applied to the city in this case, right?

1427
03:22:44,580 --> 03:22:51,880
And that's a, I'll say, a radical departure from every area of law where a claimant

1428
03:22:51,880 --> 03:22:56,220
is seeking damages and the burden is on them to prove the damages.

1429
03:22:57,220 --> 03:23:04,860
So consistent, we breathe this issue thoroughly and the general run of eminent domain cases.

1430
03:23:05,140 --> 03:23:10,940
The city has the burden to come forward and show the petition that the city has satisfied

1431
03:23:10,940 --> 03:23:16,020
the statutory criteria for the transfer to actually happen, but then when it comes to the

1432
03:23:16,020 --> 03:23:21,900
matter of compensation, it's on the property owner to prove up their actual damages if

1433
03:23:21,900 --> 03:23:29,100
in the loss. It's not on the government to prove that. And so as we submitted that burden is

1434
03:23:29,100 --> 03:23:35,060
properly on Excel, and especially with the lack of slate and specific data here, we feel it's

1435
03:23:35,060 --> 03:23:41,040
important to not put the city in an impossible burden of just proving the thing that nobody

1436
03:23:41,040 --> 03:23:46,700
could possibly prove. And so we would respectfully disagree with the the party's new

1437
03:23:46,700 --> 03:23:56,480
14. Okay and this isn't an eminent domain proceeding but maybe I'm not going to get into an argument

1438
03:23:56,480 --> 03:24:07,880
with you about that. But let's turn to the company on commissioner partages new language that

1439
03:24:07,880 --> 03:24:16,340
she put forward that is shaping up to be like an overall decision option package where the

1440
03:24:16,340 --> 03:24:24,520
commission would have an order coming out of this. Concerns that have an already been articulated

1441
03:24:24,520 --> 03:24:31,580
or thoughts on a language contained on the screen or that's otherwise new.

1442
03:24:32,300 --> 03:24:32,840
Thank you, Chair.

1443
03:24:33,420 --> 03:24:33,840
Oh, sorry.

1444
03:24:34,020 --> 03:24:34,380
Too loud.

1445
03:24:35,080 --> 03:24:36,400
I'll take this in two pieces.

1446
03:24:36,600 --> 03:24:38,020
First, the new alternative.

1447
03:24:38,680 --> 03:24:40,320
I don't know what version of 10A.

1448
03:24:40,880 --> 03:24:42,420
We are comfortable with this language.

1449
03:24:43,500 --> 03:24:45,400
On the timing for the compliance filing,

1450
03:24:45,660 --> 03:24:47,120
we would suggest six months.

1451
03:24:47,500 --> 03:24:51,140
We're pretty confident that the distribution engineering work will be done by then.

1452
03:24:51,540 --> 03:24:55,620
If the MISO work is not done, what we would do is provide an update.

1453
03:24:56,400 --> 03:24:58,960
That's a little bit out of our control. We're hopeful that it would be done.

1454
03:25:00,000 --> 03:25:01,720
On the rest of the package,

1455
03:25:03,960 --> 03:25:15,760
we think there's substantial evidence in the record that would support our recommendation on the last revenues. I know the commission hasn't been interested in discussing that. I'm happy to talk about it further if you would like.

1456
03:25:17,180 --> 03:25:26,880
We put in a lot of evidence to support the two changes that we're proposing, but other than that, we're comfortable with the rest of the decision options.

1457
03:25:29,640 --> 03:25:30,900
You know, Madam Chair.

1458
03:25:30,960 --> 03:25:31,400
Commissioner.

1459
03:25:33,740 --> 03:25:34,540
Reviewed everything.

1460
03:25:35,980 --> 03:25:37,240
You know, this process works.

1461
03:25:37,380 --> 03:25:38,760
You had a chance from the ALJ.

1462
03:25:39,100 --> 03:25:40,840
You know, so we have what we have in the record.

1463
03:25:41,560 --> 03:25:43,320
And that's, I think, the frustrating thing about this.

1464
03:25:43,320 --> 03:25:45,740
You all got to want to continue to argue with each other.

1465
03:25:46,040 --> 03:25:46,720
Arguments over.

1466
03:25:46,940 --> 03:25:48,360
You had your chance for the ALJ.

1467
03:25:48,960 --> 03:25:54,120
We've read all the reply comments to the exceptions and the exceptions.

1468
03:25:55,640 --> 03:25:58,640
All that evidence, trade secret, whole bunch of stuff.

1469
03:25:58,640 --> 03:26:01,180
I mean, it's thick.

1470
03:26:01,980 --> 03:26:03,420
Okay, so we've gone through it.

1471
03:26:03,680 --> 03:26:06,240
So I don't know why we're still

1472
03:26:06,240 --> 03:26:08,560
spinning around wanting to fight with each other.

1473
03:26:08,740 --> 03:26:10,060
Okay, I get it, you're not getting along

1474
03:26:10,060 --> 03:26:10,960
and it didn't go well.

1475
03:26:11,000 --> 03:26:12,940
I've been in litigation before too, okay?

1476
03:26:13,640 --> 03:26:15,520
But at this stage, I'm ready.

1477
03:26:15,600 --> 03:26:16,360
I know where I'm at.

1478
03:26:16,520 --> 03:26:19,540
I thought the city approved their burden.

1479
03:26:19,560 --> 03:26:20,540
I thought they met their burden.

1480
03:26:20,600 --> 03:26:22,240
I thought their decision option was good,

1481
03:26:22,400 --> 03:26:25,160
but I'm also open to hearing what you have to say

1482
03:26:25,160 --> 03:26:27,960
on the Hail J. So I'm not really inclined

1483
03:26:27,960 --> 03:26:33,340
want to sit there and rehash it. Mr. Berg, I appreciate it reading your testimony. It was very

1484
03:26:33,340 --> 03:26:39,300
well done. I enjoyed the read, but only once. Okay, so I mean, I don't want to keep going around

1485
03:26:39,300 --> 03:26:43,960
it again and again and again. It was a very good, it was very well laid out. I think you put a very

1486
03:26:43,960 --> 03:26:50,360
good case together. Okay, that's where I'm at. Okay, and I know all my fellow commissioners have done

1487
03:26:50,360 --> 03:26:55,740
the same thing, if dug into this in depth. So I don't, Mr. Varlay, I appreciate you wanting to,

1488
03:26:55,740 --> 03:27:02,720
You know, re-argue your case and your briefs and everything, but you add your chance, you know, judge

1489
03:27:02,720 --> 03:27:08,080
Mosling is a good judge, you add your chance, okay. And I know you have new information, that's part

1490
03:27:08,080 --> 03:27:13,960
of the problem that I get into is that it just keeps turning. It feels like I'm revisiting a past

1491
03:27:13,960 --> 03:27:19,240
IRPs where I'm constantly getting new information at the last minute trying to do this and do that.

1492
03:27:19,420 --> 03:27:24,700
I got, I got a record, I'm comfortable with my record. I think it's a good record. I think both

1493
03:27:24,700 --> 03:27:30,720
parties have done a good job. So I don't know where my fellow commissioners are at, but I

1494
03:27:30,720 --> 03:27:36,060
just want to do this pretty good. Are you frustrated that you don't think that the loss

1495
03:27:36,060 --> 03:27:42,000
revenue that is coming up wasn't incorporated into the mill rate? You know, because I read

1496
03:27:42,000 --> 03:27:51,560
it as just to try to articulate like commissioner partridge laid out a decision option path

1497
03:27:51,560 --> 03:27:54,180
that is mostly accepting the ALG report.

1498
03:27:54,480 --> 03:27:58,220
And that kind of, there has been a lot of record evidence

1499
03:27:58,720 --> 03:28:01,400
that to your point, the judge incorporated

1500
03:28:01,400 --> 03:28:04,600
into the recommendation that we now have.

1501
03:28:05,320 --> 03:28:07,300
And I understand that the city doesn't agree

1502
03:28:07,300 --> 03:28:12,740
with many of the components that made up that lump sum

1503
03:28:12,740 --> 03:28:15,080
or the mill rate.

1504
03:28:15,700 --> 03:28:20,920
But I think for our role is to step back

1505
03:28:20,920 --> 03:28:24,700
and be like, what does the evidence that we have now show

1506
03:28:24,700 --> 03:28:28,240
will be fair for all parties?

1507
03:28:28,720 --> 03:28:30,920
And it's sort of like, we can say,

1508
03:28:30,920 --> 03:28:37,260
I said the ALJ report was well done and made sense,

1509
03:28:37,580 --> 03:28:39,840
you know, from my read of it.

1510
03:28:40,160 --> 03:28:44,460
And then it's like, these issues keep coming up today.

1511
03:28:44,860 --> 03:28:49,360
And it's like, but then you go back and it's like,

1512
03:28:49,360 --> 03:28:57,020
it kind of is incorporated into the record already. So, you know, I think it's our job to be

1513
03:28:57,020 --> 03:29:04,000
clear about what our role is as the commission is to put an offer out there, which if I

1514
03:29:04,000 --> 03:29:11,500
understand commissioner partages motion correctly is like mostly the ALJ report with some

1515
03:29:11,500 --> 03:29:19,060
tweaks and I get that the city doesn't think that's a great outcome for for the city of

1516
03:29:20,120 --> 03:29:26,100
But that's not that's up for you guys to decide then is this the compensation we want to

1517
03:29:27,580 --> 03:29:35,160
pay Excel to make Excel rate pairs whole or fair, you know, it's a fair compensation.

1518
03:29:36,100 --> 03:29:42,120
So I'm sorry that there are you in too, but I think if we step back and are like we have a good record,

1519
03:29:42,620 --> 03:29:48,180
the Department of Commerce is supportive of what Commissioner Partridge is doing too.

1520
03:29:50,440 --> 03:29:56,160
I think it's, I get that no one's happy, but what else do you have?

1521
03:29:56,760 --> 03:29:58,120
And I'm agreeing with you, man.

1522
03:29:58,280 --> 03:29:59,960
I just want to get, I just want to make it for...

1523
03:30:00,000 --> 03:30:29,980
We have reviewed this record. I don't need to hear the arguments over and over again as well. I'm trying to say, you know, it's a close call. I mean, I think I close call in my mind. I do view Excel a little different than what people's and Rochester would be like. That's why I don't know if I'd weigh much on that precedent. I think Excel is a vertical integrity utility has ability to move its investments around more robustly than would people's down in Rochester would have been. But it's really not apples to apples too, because it was only a part of it.

1524
03:30:30,000 --> 03:30:35,800
take over and so we're not looking at a whole substation move and so there's a lot of things you

1525
03:30:35,800 --> 03:30:40,300
can go both ways. Now, if I were sitting in the judges, you know, I want to make that very clear.

1526
03:30:40,440 --> 03:30:45,180
If I was sitting in the judges, you, I probably would have said that the city met their burden.

1527
03:30:45,340 --> 03:30:49,440
I would be comfortable with what their recommendation has. But again, I think it's extremely close

1528
03:30:49,440 --> 03:30:54,740
call and I would not necessarily go against this camel too because she understands the finances

1529
03:30:54,740 --> 03:31:01,120
far better than I do. So that's the kind of how I fell on it. I mean, I'm not the way the

1530
03:31:01,120 --> 03:31:05,060
cartridge motion is right now. I don't think I've already guessed it. So I mean, it's just struggling

1531
03:31:05,060 --> 03:31:12,500
with it's a close call. Because of the payment or because of the, that's what I'm not tracking

1532
03:31:12,500 --> 03:31:17,300
what you're saying. Where a close call is is that I don't think that they don't have as,

1533
03:31:17,620 --> 03:31:23,560
they're not at as difficult of a position under this statute to figure out their lost revenues,

1534
03:31:23,560 --> 03:31:29,460
or last revenues is the thing, the legislature put in there, to keep it from becoming a game

1535
03:31:29,460 --> 03:31:35,520
where utilities are getting played by the communities and back and forth and back and forth.

1536
03:31:35,720 --> 03:31:43,560
So that was their barrier. And so in analyzing it, I would have been a little bit more lenient

1537
03:31:43,560 --> 03:31:48,220
on that number. I probably would have leaned more towards where the city was at just because I think

1538
03:31:48,220 --> 03:31:52,720
Excel has the ability to move assets around a lot more efficiently than say people's

1539
03:31:52,720 --> 03:31:55,660
That was what the Department's argument was.

1540
03:31:55,820 --> 03:31:56,420
We have a precedent.

1541
03:31:56,600 --> 03:31:57,700
We're going to run with the precedent.

1542
03:31:58,580 --> 03:32:00,040
That puts us at 10 years.

1543
03:32:00,120 --> 03:32:00,820
That was fair.

1544
03:32:01,100 --> 03:32:02,280
And that was their analysis.

1545
03:32:03,280 --> 03:32:06,080
I would have probably muddled around with that 10 years a little bit.

1546
03:32:06,160 --> 03:32:07,760
If I sat as the judge.

1547
03:32:08,100 --> 03:32:09,160
I'm not the judge right now.

1548
03:32:09,800 --> 03:32:14,460
I have to determine whether this ALJ report and commissioner partage is motion is sufficient.

1549
03:32:14,920 --> 03:32:17,180
But I'm just saying, I struggled with it.

1550
03:32:17,180 --> 03:32:27,720
I mean, I just because I view the way exalcon handle their lost revenue and people's could would have been two different things and I probably would have looked at ten years versus five years a little differently.

1551
03:32:28,520 --> 03:32:37,020
But I have right now on front of me ten years and so I have to now make the top decision is that is that a good outcome with all these other changes.

1552
03:32:37,320 --> 03:32:43,540
Sorry, I didn't mean to put you so much on the spot, but it is and I know I know you want to say something but work.

1553
03:32:43,540 --> 03:32:45,580
I'm just talking to the commissioners right now.

1554
03:32:46,000 --> 03:32:49,640
We have to make a decision out of five of us independently.

1555
03:32:49,640 --> 03:32:52,700
And we don't get to talk to each other about it.

1556
03:32:52,700 --> 03:32:53,780
So this is why-

1557
03:32:53,780 --> 03:32:54,800
You just heard our conversation.

1558
03:32:55,020 --> 03:32:57,060
We would have, if it legislates, you're back in the bathrooms.

1559
03:32:57,640 --> 03:32:58,640
But we can't do that.

1560
03:32:58,760 --> 03:33:02,900
So that's why I'm trying to just see where my colleagues are

1561
03:33:02,900 --> 03:33:06,580
to kind of try to help us figure out what we're going to do.

1562
03:33:06,620 --> 03:33:08,360
So I'm not trying to be disrespectful.

1563
03:33:08,720 --> 03:33:11,500
I'm trying to hear where my colleagues are

1564
03:33:11,500 --> 03:33:20,620
because like I said earlier, this is new language and we're all kind of trying to figure it out on where we're comfortable with.

1565
03:33:21,620 --> 03:33:34,300
Commissioner Sullivan, do you want to think about things or say anything now or have a sense of where you are that would be helpful or Commissioner Hump?

1566
03:33:34,300 --> 03:33:35,980
Thank you, Chair Stephen.

1567
03:33:36,820 --> 03:33:49,980
Yeah, sometimes this is very counterintuitive, but I think that typically our utility has a large capital investment and a lot of the operation has a economies of scale.

1568
03:33:50,320 --> 03:33:54,000
I think that's why they have a monopoly and we have a regulatory compact.

1569
03:33:54,000 --> 03:34:01,580
That's why sometimes you just do the simple accounting calculation that doesn't meet this

1570
03:34:01,580 --> 03:34:03,760
number based on the economy of scale.

1571
03:34:04,720 --> 03:34:11,020
So that can make things difficult to understand sometimes.

1572
03:34:11,160 --> 03:34:16,040
So that's why I don't think we need to go into one detail.

1573
03:34:16,440 --> 03:34:20,900
I agree that I think a record is records and based on this record, I can make a decision.

1574
03:34:20,900 --> 03:34:28,720
today that I understand the frustration and the city that simple accounting number sometimes

1575
03:34:28,720 --> 03:34:36,800
doesn't meet these overall lost opportunity class, which is the opportunity cost concept

1576
03:34:36,800 --> 03:34:43,860
and that economics of scale, that number is very confusing numbers. But I think it's a

1577
03:34:43,860 --> 03:34:49,480
well-founded economic number. I think that's why I can make a decision based on today's number.

1578
03:34:49,480 --> 03:34:52,580
I mean, if I were right to statute, I wouldn't, I wouldn't, I wouldn't, I wouldn't say.

1579
03:34:53,160 --> 03:34:57,780
The mutants you get to, you just pay the depreciation cost, the cost after depreciation.

1580
03:34:58,260 --> 03:34:59,880
Okay, but you asked to become a mutant.

1581
03:35:00,400 --> 03:35:29,940
Okay, and you must stay immune for X-Men number of years. You can't go in and out in and out. And any legislature, case that lost revenue as kind of the stop gaps so that they're not just grabbing, you know, deciding, we're going to go with the auditor tail this this month and we're going to go with nobles next year and we're going to, they needed to put something in there to keep that from happening. That's right, strongly disagree to Mr. Barrel and glad you didn't raise it up on, you know, the fact that they have to be immune. I don't think they have to go into a lot, but,

1582
03:35:30,000 --> 03:35:34,260
That's just irrelevant, but that's where I looked at it.

1583
03:35:34,260 --> 03:35:38,700
I said the legislature put that in this as the guard, and now we have to interpret it,

1584
03:35:38,740 --> 03:35:43,900
which is not an easy interpretation as you're just pointed out, Commissioner Hallm, and I do

1585
03:35:43,900 --> 03:35:50,680
put a lot of value in how Ms. Campbell looks at these issues, because she has done a swell

1586
03:35:50,680 --> 03:35:55,700
over the years and rate cases, so that's a lot, a lot of this going on.

1587
03:35:56,280 --> 03:35:59,800
so. Commissioner Sullivan and then we'll take a break.

1588
03:36:02,560 --> 03:36:07,330
I'm right now I'm ready to go. So

1589
03:36:08,130 --> 03:36:15,290
I don't have like any outtake or for vote. I don't mean outtake or anything. I'm I'm just

1590
03:36:15,290 --> 03:36:19,550
you're ready to vote on Commissioner Partridge's motion. Yep. In support of it.

1591
03:36:21,070 --> 03:36:26,170
Well we can wait. Well I mean this is my chance. I feel like no I don't. I just

1592
03:36:26,890 --> 03:36:33,630
I mean, no, I think, and I have reviewed the ALJ's decision.

1593
03:36:34,870 --> 03:36:40,190
I kind of said where I was at before at the, from the jump that, you know, I was in the

1594
03:36:41,510 --> 03:36:48,210
blend between, you know, the longer term generation costs, distribution costs, I said 15

1595
03:36:48,210 --> 03:36:52,390
years, so actually like, I would, the city probably wouldn't want to hear, but I'd have probably

1596
03:36:52,390 --> 03:36:57,130
a little bit higher millerate because of the reasons that Commissioner Ham was mentioning

1597
03:36:57,130 --> 03:37:05,450
and I do think these economies of scale are they can obfuscate or they can make it look

1598
03:37:05,450 --> 03:37:15,690
like it's less expensive than it actually is and so I mean I'm ultimately you know I'm

1599
03:37:15,690 --> 03:37:22,370
frustrated the whole situation and I think that the city has been put in a bad spot

1600
03:37:24,190 --> 03:37:47,150
And, you know, but the numbers are the numbers and I know the city disagrees with the numbers and I know they'd rather have had it's talk more about it today, but I can assure you we've reviewed the documents and we've reviewed them and thought them through and the conversation that you heard here, like Commissioner Seaman had said is these are the things that we have to hash out between us and we have to have that conversation between these issues.

1601
03:37:47,150 --> 03:37:55,370
are, you know, we have to see where everybody's at, but, I mean, I'm ready to go on the

1602
03:37:55,370 --> 03:37:57,170
underlying decision, so.

1603
03:37:57,250 --> 03:37:57,710
Okay.

1604
03:37:58,650 --> 03:38:05,290
I just want to talk to the attorneys about the burden of proof issue one more time.

1605
03:38:06,470 --> 03:38:14,810
So, we'll need a few minutes to do that, and then we can come back from, uh,

1606
03:38:14,810 --> 03:38:17,530
about about 10 minutes from a recess.

1607
03:38:18,390 --> 03:38:20,110
So the Commission stands in recess.

1608
04:06:13,100 --> 04:06:21,700
The commission will come back from its recess and Mr. Black, I understand you wanted to address the commission briefly, please.

1609
04:06:22,260 --> 04:06:25,240
And state your name and the organization you're representing for the record.

1610
04:06:25,800 --> 04:06:32,060
Thank you, Madam Chair and commissioners. My name is Bill Black. I'm government relations attorney for the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association.

1611
04:06:32,500 --> 04:06:41,380
I just wanted to state real briefly that the impact of this decision may be much wider than we are all talking about, whether or not

1612
04:06:41,380 --> 04:06:46,680
It's like, and does municipalize the impact on municipal utilities ability to grow with their

1613
04:06:46,680 --> 04:06:52,040
cities, could be devastated with a precedent of 116 mills.

1614
04:06:52,320 --> 04:06:56,900
Okay, Mr. Black, is this information, or are you a party in the record?

1615
04:06:58,060 --> 04:07:00,020
We did not file to be heard.

1616
04:07:00,020 --> 04:07:07,000
And I think at this point, like, we're, you're trying to, like, blowing us up in a way.

1617
04:07:07,200 --> 04:07:09,040
I'm not really comfortable with.

1618
04:07:09,040 --> 04:07:18,280
So we appreciate that you always had time to file comments into the record and could have

1619
04:07:18,280 --> 04:07:24,600
petitioned to be a party, but I have a feeling that if I let you keep talking someone

1620
04:07:24,600 --> 04:07:30,440
else is going to be really angry at the commission and then we're going to have other

1621
04:07:30,440 --> 04:07:32,160
issues to have to handle.

1622
04:07:32,160 --> 04:07:39,960
So, thank you and my apologies for saying you could speak and then cutting you off.

1623
04:07:41,440 --> 04:07:50,540
Commissioner Partridge, on your overall motion and the legal issues that you discussed

1624
04:07:50,540 --> 04:07:55,460
with staff on the break, could you provide comments, please?

1625
04:07:55,460 --> 04:07:57,280
Thank you, Chair Steven.

1626
04:07:57,740 --> 04:08:08,900
So I am prepared to make an overall motion the I will be making a modification, what I had initially said, which is that I will just remove my new 14.

1627
04:08:09,260 --> 04:08:22,500
I think that the bottom line is that under either burden of proof, the result is the same in my mind that we have sufficient information into the record to make our decision.

1628
04:08:22,500 --> 04:08:28,200
And that we, as a commission, don't really need to weigh in on that particular item.

1629
04:08:29,120 --> 04:08:35,360
So, your striking, your overall motion would not include partridge new 14.

1630
04:08:35,860 --> 04:08:41,600
Yes. And I would like to give a complete overall motion when you're ready to.

1631
04:08:42,760 --> 04:08:44,660
Yes. Thank you.

1632
04:08:45,880 --> 04:08:46,260
You ready?

1633
04:08:47,820 --> 04:08:54,540
And are you working off of your off of the briefing paper?

1634
04:08:55,680 --> 04:08:55,740
Okay.

1635
04:08:56,520 --> 04:08:58,060
Or is it going on the screen?

1636
04:08:58,200 --> 04:08:59,200
I don't know.

1637
04:08:59,540 --> 04:09:01,020
The new language may be too.

1638
04:09:02,100 --> 04:09:03,940
Thank you.

1639
04:09:04,880 --> 04:09:11,260
Mr. Patterson, if you would pull up the new modified modified modified 10A.

1640
04:09:14,560 --> 04:09:24,120
And then my proposed motion would be working off of staff's, or refers to staff's compiled

1641
04:09:24,760 --> 04:09:30,600
decision options from August 16th, just noting that those numbers are different than

1642
04:09:30,600 --> 04:09:37,800
what was in the briefing papers, so I apologize for that, and then my own filing data

1643
04:09:37,800 --> 04:09:45,920
to August 19th. So it's sorry for two different documents, Chair. My proposal is adopting

1644
04:09:45,920 --> 04:09:50,220
decision option number three, which is to accept the ALJ report with modifications.

1645
04:09:53,060 --> 04:09:53,500
The

1646
04:09:54,860 --> 04:09:59,980
modified 10A that is shown on the screen, noting that we do need some...

1647
04:10:00,000 --> 04:10:04,320
Number to fill in here for days after this decision.

1648
04:10:07,360 --> 04:10:11,620
Decision option 11, which is to determine that

1649
04:10:11,620 --> 04:10:18,040
Excel has not waved its right to dispute the property sales associated with the transfer. And then

1650
04:10:18,040 --> 04:10:23,980
cartridge, new 15 is determined that the city of Slayton has complied with the requirements of

1651
04:10:23,980 --> 04:10:30,700
statute to 16D-45 to bring the issue of just compensation before the commission and to the

1652
04:10:30,700 --> 04:10:34,720
extent that Excel argues the city's proposal does not constitute a municipal utility

1653
04:10:34,720 --> 04:10:39,900
to 16D-45 does not direct the commission to make that determination when a utility of

1654
04:10:39,900 --> 04:10:41,320
jacks to acquisition of its property.

1655
04:10:41,760 --> 04:10:48,660
So that is my complete motion again, three modified 10A 11 and my new 15.

1656
04:10:49,040 --> 04:10:52,560
And since I was the one that put 10 forward and listening to the conversations, I understand

1657
04:10:52,560 --> 04:10:58,320
more of the city's response would. But I think we should put 30 days in there just to give

1658
04:10:58,320 --> 04:11:07,920
time for discussion. But I do hear what the city's saying. And for the department earlier,

1659
04:11:08,240 --> 04:11:18,110
you said you didn't have strong feelings about partridge, new 15 and commissioner partridge is not

1660
04:11:18,110 --> 04:11:20,670
moving new 15, 14 anymore.

1661
04:11:21,670 --> 04:11:24,190
And so could you comment on both of those?

1662
04:11:24,570 --> 04:11:27,250
I assume you're fine then, not moving new 14,

1663
04:11:27,750 --> 04:11:31,130
but what about partridge new 15?

1664
04:11:31,250 --> 04:11:34,830
Did you have any time on the break to think about that more?

1665
04:11:35,470 --> 04:11:36,330
Chair Sivan,

1666
04:11:38,370 --> 04:11:41,050
with new 14 being removed.

1667
04:11:41,170 --> 04:11:43,230
That was the major concern that we had.

1668
04:11:43,530 --> 04:11:45,190
15 wasn't as concerning.

1669
04:11:45,190 --> 04:11:51,610
um as far as um so you're fine with including

1670
04:11:51,610 --> 04:11:56,890
partridge new 15 yeah that's fine okay great um sorry

1671
04:11:56,890 --> 04:12:01,030
something else a decision option 11 we didn't support

1672
04:12:01,030 --> 04:12:04,810
that uh we believe Excel has whipped it's right to

1673
04:12:04,810 --> 04:12:08,790
procedurally challenge tell me a little bit more about that

1674
04:12:08,790 --> 04:12:13,330
because I my brain wasn't focused on that short um

1675
04:12:13,330 --> 04:12:15,490
I'd suggest not, but that's okay.

1676
04:12:16,410 --> 04:12:21,310
We believe the department believes that Excel has waived its opportunity to procedurally challenge

1677
04:12:21,310 --> 04:12:30,020
and waver and that's because we've endured an entire contested case process and there has been

1678
04:12:30,020 --> 04:12:34,860
ample time and Excel has continued participation has waived that.

1679
04:12:37,990 --> 04:12:41,350
And Mr. Barlow on that number 11.

1680
04:12:43,070 --> 04:12:50,970
Thank you chair. We're fine with decision option 11. I don't, we have been objecting. I understand

1681
04:12:50,970 --> 04:12:55,290
the commission's going to move forward. I'm not trying to make an argument about that, but

1682
04:12:55,290 --> 04:12:59,350
I don't understand how you could find that we've. I'm sorry. I don't really understand

1683
04:12:59,350 --> 04:13:03,670
Ms. Hundals analysis, but we're comfortable with 11. We don't think it's critical to

1684
04:13:03,670 --> 04:13:09,890
the decision in it largely restates what we've been saying in the case.

1685
04:13:16,240 --> 04:13:25,740
I'm going to share. I mean, I, we can get into it. We really don't need to. I, I just don't think it is our business simply put. I mean, it's just not.

1686
04:13:26,600 --> 04:13:37,060
The legislature put put in the way this statute is to be read. If you read it, it's very clear. They say municipality and don't say that that is going to become.

1687
04:13:38,120 --> 04:13:43,080
There's a municipal utility, it just has a municipality and that's very clearly defined

1688
04:13:43,080 --> 04:13:49,180
in the statute, and they use in 2016B municipal utility multiple places, so they obviously

1689
04:13:49,180 --> 04:13:49,980
knew the difference.

1690
04:13:50,520 --> 04:13:54,280
I don't know why we're even delving into this issue at all.

1691
04:13:54,900 --> 04:13:59,140
I mean, it's outside of our jurisdiction, if they want to go to the legislature, if

1692
04:13:59,140 --> 04:14:02,440
they think they have an action in court, which I don't think they do, they can deal with

1693
04:14:02,440 --> 04:14:02,660
that.

1694
04:14:02,940 --> 04:14:06,600
But in front of us, we have a statute, there was a petition in front of us.

1695
04:14:06,600 --> 04:14:10,520
we need to determine what the fair value is for this municipality and that's what we're doing.

1696
04:14:10,900 --> 04:14:14,980
So you just assume leave decision option 11 out. Is that what you're saying?

1697
04:14:15,580 --> 04:14:19,680
I just don't think it matters. So I'm fine with it again. So you're fine with it in.

1698
04:14:21,520 --> 04:14:27,980
Okay. Any other commissioner want to comment on the overall motion?

1699
04:14:30,220 --> 04:14:36,420
Are parties ready to or our commissioners ready to vote on the overall motion?

1700
04:14:36,420 --> 04:14:41,620
clear on what it is. Yeah, can I just make one statement? I do want to just say that the

1701
04:14:41,620 --> 04:14:48,000
job of the commission is to look within the record and review the record and we cannot

1702
04:14:48,000 --> 04:14:54,440
on the fly and on the bench start coming up with new numbers and negotiating new numbers with

1703
04:14:54,440 --> 04:14:59,980
parties. And so we are making our decision with what's in the record. And I just want to

1704
04:15:00,000 --> 04:15:13,720
I wanted to reiterate that I think it's in state and multiple times, but this commission has to review what's in the record and work with the numbers and data that we have, and I have nothing else that I wanted to add.

1705
04:15:13,720 --> 04:15:21,380
Okay, on commissioner, um, cartridges of, we just rest in it really quick.

1706
04:15:24,930 --> 04:15:25,390
Yeah, decision

1707
04:15:25,390 --> 04:15:26,570
option three,

1708
04:15:31,300 --> 04:15:34,680
the modified 10 A,

1709
04:15:38,280 --> 04:15:38,760
11,

1710
04:15:44,030 --> 04:15:52,670
and partridge new 15. And just to be clear, the department,

1711
04:15:52,670 --> 04:15:55,030
and you're supportive of the overall motion.

1712
04:15:55,750 --> 04:15:57,130
Yes, she's not in.

1713
04:15:57,670 --> 04:15:58,790
We've got that before.

1714
04:15:59,310 --> 04:16:03,030
The city of Slayton, we understand you don't like the motion

1715
04:16:03,670 --> 04:16:06,130
overall and you're opposed to it correct.

1716
04:16:06,290 --> 04:16:07,510
That's correct, Madam Chair.

1717
04:16:08,250 --> 04:16:11,330
And Excel on the overall motion.

1718
04:16:13,550 --> 04:16:14,030
Thank you, Chair.

1719
04:16:14,290 --> 04:16:16,130
We would have recommended some different things

1720
04:16:16,130 --> 04:16:18,030
but we understand the motion and I'm not here

1721
04:16:18,030 --> 04:16:20,590
to bracelet a bunch of objections at this point.

1722
04:16:22,000 --> 04:16:24,720
It seems like the commission's got to go right.

1723
04:16:25,440 --> 04:16:26,540
I'm very unhappy.

1724
04:16:27,020 --> 04:16:27,380
There we go.

1725
04:16:28,460 --> 04:16:28,700
Okay.

1726
04:16:28,960 --> 04:16:32,160
Well, everyone's clear on what the motion is.

1727
04:16:32,780 --> 04:16:36,980
And we'll proceed to vote on Commissioner Partridge's overall motion.

1728
04:16:37,280 --> 04:16:38,740
All in favor, please say aye.

1729
04:16:38,760 --> 04:16:39,120
Aye.

1730
04:16:40,080 --> 04:16:40,600
Opposed.

1731
04:16:40,840 --> 04:16:42,060
The motion prevails.

1732
04:16:42,720 --> 04:16:43,900
Thank you very much, everyone.

1733
04:16:47,140 --> 04:16:51,680
We have a lot of people who have been waiting for documents five and six in the back.

1734
04:16:51,680 --> 04:16:59,240
So we'll get started on DACA 5 as soon as folks get in place.

1735
04:17:00,120 --> 04:17:01,540
Thanks for your patience.

1736
04:17:06,550 --> 04:17:08,090
It's a little bit after 12.30.

1737
04:17:11,750 --> 04:17:13,570
Well, it's before 12.30 in Hawaii.

1738
04:17:50,100 --> 04:17:52,720
And didn't decide that we're going to get you up here earlier.

1739
04:17:56,500 --> 04:17:58,320
I saw you hiding in the back there.

1740
04:18:00,700 --> 04:18:01,420
Good

1741
04:18:13,220 --> 04:18:17,120
news, Mr. Barallaud, didn't throw you under the bus, so.

1742
04:18:19,880 --> 04:18:20,600
No.

1743
04:18:22,820 --> 04:18:23,480
Go right ahead.

1744
04:18:43,690 --> 04:18:48,010
Mr. Durand, please introduce item number four or five.

1745
04:18:48,230 --> 04:18:51,170
I mean, let's not do four again.

1746
04:18:54,090 --> 04:18:57,370
I hope this one is a little simpler, but mostly.

1747
04:18:58,530 --> 04:19:00,930
Good afternoon, Chair Sivan, and commissioners.

1748
04:19:01,290 --> 04:19:08,710
Item number five is for a doc at number e99-9-c-i-16-521, and the

1749
04:19:08,710 --> 04:19:12,590
updating in the matter of updating the generic standards for the interconnection

1750
04:19:12,590 --> 04:19:17,470
in operation of distributed generation facilities established under Minnesota Statue

1751
04:19:17,470 --> 04:19:33,910
16B 11 or 1611. The question before the commission is should the commission approve the technical subgroups proposed changes to the MNIP and the TIR regarding battery energy stored systems and limited slash non export systems.

1752
04:19:34,450 --> 04:19:40,610
There are no wait file comments or decision options. Staff has no further remarks, but it is a little bit more questions. Thank you.

1753
04:19:42,460 --> 04:19:47,640
Okay, thank you, and we weren't going to have opening comments, right?

1754
04:19:48,740 --> 04:19:54,620
First, before we begin, and I'm sure other commenters will, or other commissioners will say this,

1755
04:19:54,760 --> 04:19:59,860
but I wanted to really think all of the parties, and especially you, Mr. Diana.

1756
04:20:00,000 --> 04:20:19,940
For working through so much of the stakeholder process that has led to this good outcome, I know it's been a ton of extra work and you were, you know, very minnesota and saying, no, it wasn't me, it was other people, but we know that you did a ton of work, so.

1757
04:20:19,940 --> 04:20:21,740
He's learning from Arizona too.

1758
04:20:23,320 --> 04:20:29,160
Thank you very much Mr. Durian for all your work on this item and not just in preparing

1759
04:20:29,160 --> 04:20:35,120
the briefing papers, but the work for the technical subgroup too, so we appreciate that.

1760
04:20:35,540 --> 04:20:41,820
So Commissioner Sullivan, I mean, excuse me. Thank you, Chair Sivan. I concur with that.

1761
04:20:42,260 --> 04:20:49,320
Yes, as a lead commissioner for the DCWG, I watched how Mr Durian was working on this issue

1762
04:20:49,320 --> 04:20:55,940
And a lot of people doesn't see what he's doing behind the scene on this kind of work, and I think we should give him a lot of credit.

1763
04:20:56,600 --> 04:21:03,680
And also I really respect all those working group participants. I think it is a lot of work.

1764
04:21:05,220 --> 04:21:12,240
But also, as I said during the meeting, and I think a tiny sense, we need to move on quickly as soon as possible.

1765
04:21:12,240 --> 04:21:21,680
So if there is any small difference, we better move on and if you can fix it, some small difference later, we can do it later.

1766
04:21:22,320 --> 04:21:37,400
I think I really appreciate all the participant of the DGWG and then also at the one point I think the DGWG member was able to bring commissioner for more commissioner measure to the table and that was very helpful.

1767
04:21:39,820 --> 04:21:49,020
things that I don't have any specific question except I have some possible motions so I can ask

1768
04:21:49,020 --> 04:21:56,100
party about that. That might be a more productive rather than I do the Q&A. So I'll make

1769
04:21:56,100 --> 04:22:00,680
a mark motion and then see what reaction we are getting from the party.

1770
04:22:03,770 --> 04:22:06,350
So at this time, I'm thinking

1771
04:22:06,350 --> 04:22:23,570
about moving decision option 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13, and 16,

1772
04:22:32,720 --> 04:22:33,900
and then I can ask a

1773
04:22:33,900 --> 04:22:43,380
is whether there's a acceptable one at and so let's start with the easy target, Mr. Heinen.

1774
04:22:48,570 --> 04:22:55,270
Chair Seabin, Commissioner's Adam Heinen with the Code Electric Association. Overall, Commissioner

1775
04:22:55,270 --> 04:23:04,650
Ham, draft motion is not a jack tumultus, couple items, you know, three we had, you know,

1776
04:23:04,650 --> 04:23:14,650
decisions before it be preferred, but I think we can live with decision options three, especially if we have a little more discussion around the insurance question and then

1777
04:23:17,030 --> 04:23:20,250
I think we are okay with the

1778
04:23:20,250 --> 04:23:24,520
I already have of the. Okay, thank you.

1779
04:23:28,480 --> 04:23:30,040
Sure, see you in the commissioner, huh?

1780
04:23:30,380 --> 04:23:31,160
Oh, it's a lot louder.

1781
04:23:37,740 --> 04:23:38,930
We'll try that again.

1782
04:23:41,400 --> 04:23:42,840
And state your name to Mr.

1783
04:23:44,380 --> 04:23:46,160
Sure, see you in the commissioner,

1784
04:23:46,900 --> 04:23:48,980
how I'm operating with Minnesota power.

1785
04:23:49,820 --> 04:23:51,580
Overall, support the motion.

1786
04:23:53,260 --> 04:23:55,910
I just wanted to note as well with

1787
04:23:55,910 --> 04:24:02,830
I believe it was a decision option, three minutes of power actually would prefer decision

1788
04:24:02,830 --> 04:24:08,870
option for as well, and that one, the 40 versus 50 for similar reasons to what Excel

1789
04:24:08,870 --> 04:24:13,870
and Dakota indicated, and also I've been told by our technical folks as well that moving

1790
04:24:13,870 --> 04:24:20,070
from 40 to 50 for kind of a standard contract throws in a little bit of a complication

1791
04:24:20,070 --> 04:24:25,890
because you can do a 200 amp board for a 40 kilowatt, but as soon as you move to 50,

1792
04:24:25,890 --> 04:24:32,050
there's a requirement to move to 320 so there's just a little bit more complexity on

1793
04:24:33,290 --> 04:24:38,850
our end as far as that limited, you know, that number right there between the 40 and 50.

1794
04:24:39,370 --> 04:24:42,030
But it's something we can work through if need be.

1795
04:24:43,900 --> 04:24:44,260
Thank you.

1796
04:24:44,420 --> 04:24:51,860
So my question along the line is not about the engineering reliability issue.

1797
04:24:51,860 --> 04:24:59,900
So you can deduct through your contract where whoever is trying to do so that's why I'm more comfortable with the bigger larger

1798
04:25:00,000 --> 04:25:00,200
terms, aye, nay, nay, aye, nay, aye, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, no, no, no no. This is, as a, terms, yes, as a, now. At this point, what side?

1799
04:25:00,200 --> 04:25:17,440
Therefore, this side, this side, the side of the society, the side of the society. I would like to be more convening with the fortie because you are already having the system, but if, if anybody wants to do 50 with a paying extra because of a certain energy and you should, it is up to the party who wants to do that? That was my rationale there.

1800
04:25:21,310 --> 04:25:22,410
Mr. Dennis.

1801
04:25:23,270 --> 04:25:26,310
Thank you, Chair and Commissioner Ham.

1802
04:25:28,150 --> 04:25:30,050
For Excel energy, sorry.

1803
04:25:31,210 --> 04:25:34,690
The overall motion I think is generally fine.

1804
04:25:35,210 --> 04:25:38,590
We share softly the concerns that minutes

1805
04:25:38,590 --> 04:25:42,070
of power expressed on decision options three and four.

1806
04:25:43,130 --> 04:25:46,530
The only thing I do note is decision options 13 would be

1807
04:25:46,530 --> 04:25:54,270
You know, having a work group to discuss, changing, having an identity-new form, state-like contract.

1808
04:25:55,490 --> 04:26:01,730
If that moves forward, that would require or change to the rules to be reopened in the rulemaking.

1809
04:26:02,290 --> 04:26:04,830
So I'm going to make sure, but that can be discussed at the work group.

1810
04:26:05,570 --> 04:26:06,810
I like that.

1811
04:26:07,050 --> 04:26:07,550
Thank you.

1812
04:26:12,160 --> 04:26:14,600
Sidney Lee with the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

1813
04:26:15,260 --> 04:26:19,660
Mr. Hong, could you, was it 8 and 11?

1814
04:26:21,280 --> 04:26:22,880
I just want to make sure I heard it correctly.

1815
04:26:23,180 --> 04:26:24,540
That's great.

1816
04:26:25,720 --> 04:26:29,440
Yes, it is in that package and 11 is in that package.

1817
04:26:29,980 --> 04:26:33,100
Okay, and nothing additional after 8, right?

1818
04:26:33,500 --> 04:26:36,620
No, there is a no notification, nothing, so.

1819
04:26:37,060 --> 04:26:40,740
Okay, then the department has no concerns with the draft motion.

1820
04:26:41,540 --> 04:26:41,920
Thank you.

1821
04:26:41,920 --> 04:26:43,300
Steve

1822
04:26:46,050 --> 04:26:54,050
Coleman, I was an individual participant in this. I agree with all of the

1823
04:26:54,050 --> 04:27:06,470
motion, except that I do prefer option 5 over 6 and would believe it would

1824
04:27:06,470 --> 04:27:20,950
encourage more distributed energy resources, and looks forward to availability of export

1825
04:27:20,950 --> 04:27:28,650
capacity, which was not there when the interpretation was more of a nameplate capacity.

1826
04:27:29,670 --> 04:27:37,530
So I think one is looking to the past and one is looking to the future, but I appreciate your motion.

1827
04:27:41,360 --> 04:27:42,120
Mr. Zahn.

1828
04:27:45,010 --> 04:27:47,910
Madam Chair commissioners, Curtis Onon, behalf of Mincea.

1829
04:27:48,710 --> 04:27:52,430
And I want to recognize too, Mr. Durran, and I wrecked for really helping out with this process.

1830
04:27:52,490 --> 04:27:57,830
I thought it was absolutely fantastic and was happy to be part of it.

1831
04:27:57,830 --> 04:28:07,050
We support one in three with regard to six, eight and 12 are concerned to be that it's inconsistent with the clear statutory language.

1832
04:28:07,490 --> 04:28:14,090
We support 13 and I would disagree with Mr. Deniston that doing a denim for the uniform statewide contract requires rule making,

1833
04:28:14,210 --> 04:28:20,230
because that's the whole point of it's to avoid that wouldn't be changing the uniform statewide contract and obviously support 16 as well.

1834
04:28:20,490 --> 04:28:21,830
Thank you.

1835
04:28:22,470 --> 04:28:23,690
Thank you.

1836
04:28:30,980 --> 04:28:33,300
Any other questions from commissioners?

1837
04:28:33,300 --> 04:28:38,280
Mister Dennis and I'm sorry. Sorry. There's a money on line. Oh, sorry. We forgot.

1838
04:28:38,580 --> 04:28:42,180
Outer tail. Hi, Mr. Stephenson. Please state your name for the record.

1839
04:28:43,320 --> 04:28:52,380
Thank you, Madam Chair. Curie Stephenson on behalf of otter tail power company. I just wanted to make sure that we noted in the record that we do support Commissioner Homs motion.

1840
04:28:53,120 --> 04:28:55,040
Thank you. Commissioner Tuma.

1841
04:28:55,660 --> 04:29:02,060
I'm just going to not my notes, Mr. Hammond, it's Excel Energy, it's suggested six in the process.

1842
04:29:05,400 --> 04:29:09,300
And I had my notes, you know, we don't even really take action on this.

1843
04:29:10,300 --> 04:29:13,600
So what is the desire that we actually modify?

1844
04:29:14,580 --> 04:29:22,360
1.1.1 to clearly indicate that it's 10 megawatts of name capacity, because I thought that's what it is now.

1845
04:29:22,360 --> 04:29:28,500
And that's what my confusion is, why we need to state that the sky is blue, but help me out.

1846
04:29:28,760 --> 04:29:29,460
I might be missing.

1847
04:29:29,620 --> 04:29:30,040
Sure.

1848
04:29:31,480 --> 04:29:32,620
Thank you, Sharon.

1849
04:29:32,740 --> 04:29:36,460
To Mr. and to some people, you know, even though I think the sky is blue, some people

1850
04:29:36,460 --> 04:29:38,580
and the work group were saying it's a different color.

1851
04:29:39,860 --> 04:29:47,000
And therefore, in section 1.1, we think it's important to create the additional clarity.

1852
04:29:47,300 --> 04:29:49,940
The answer to the word nameplate before capacity.

1853
04:29:50,840 --> 04:29:56,760
and I think that's where we're going and I guess I didn't want to what that looks like and I

1854
04:29:56,760 --> 04:29:59,840
get your argument that you know if you look at Flint Hills it would have.

1855
04:30:00,000 --> 04:30:17,820
The doors the way they're building at a get that argument, but shouldn't that be a charge to the working group to figure that out as opposed to just saying it's ten megawatts were done. That's why I'm worried about what we're saying it's done.

1856
04:30:17,820 --> 04:30:24,420
No. No. No. So, thank you, Chair and Commissioner of Tumat. So, with Flint Hills, there

1857
04:30:24,420 --> 04:30:33,760
were 45 megawatt solar facility. We processed that application. We used Minder as a guide

1858
04:30:33,760 --> 04:30:40,080
post to what to do and then we filed them in DIA as modified with relined changes to have the

1859
04:30:40,080 --> 04:30:45,540
commission approved that end up being approved on the 30-day negative check-off. So,

1860
04:30:48,260 --> 04:30:48,660
it's

1861
04:30:48,660 --> 04:30:52,760
standing was that men to apply, had a 10 megawatt,

1862
04:30:52,760 --> 04:30:54,180
namely capacity cap.

1863
04:30:54,420 --> 04:30:56,360
We still need to use that to inform us

1864
04:30:56,360 --> 04:30:59,540
on how to process other applications that exceeded that.

1865
04:30:59,700 --> 04:31:01,180
He said, you mentioned fields.

1866
04:31:01,500 --> 04:31:03,460
We've also done some with the University of Minnesota

1867
04:31:03,460 --> 04:31:05,280
at our public record.

1868
04:31:07,520 --> 04:31:11,080
In the department, you were thinking differently.

1869
04:31:11,080 --> 04:31:13,040
I mean, you seem to be comfortable with things

1870
04:31:13,040 --> 04:31:14,000
where things are at.

1871
04:31:14,220 --> 04:31:16,920
I just want to pre-decide that we could do something

1872
04:31:16,920 --> 04:31:22,860
more along the lines of what was being suggested by some folks, but I just want to pre-decided

1873
04:31:22,860 --> 04:31:27,340
here. I didn't think I'd have enough information. So where are you at as far as six is concerned?

1874
04:31:29,040 --> 04:31:38,280
Dr. Lee, chair Steven Commissioner and Tuma, we prefer five. We don't have a strong opinion on

1875
04:31:38,280 --> 04:31:45,340
this one. I think this is the mindip. This is not about the expert capacity versus the

1876
04:31:45,340 --> 04:31:48,400
play a discussion that's going on related to net metering rates.

1877
04:31:49,220 --> 04:31:51,440
And those two things are completely separate.

1878
04:31:52,300 --> 04:31:56,780
The Department recognizes as a policy position on the mid-depth.

1879
04:31:56,960 --> 04:32:02,520
There's potentially value in citing it as export capacity, because it would encourage

1880
04:32:02,520 --> 04:32:07,820
people to have larger systems behind the meter for self-serving electricity.

1881
04:32:08,800 --> 04:32:14,480
And it acknowledges that we have technology advancements that allow the export capacity to

1882
04:32:15,020 --> 04:32:19,500
metered, such that the system impact, which is really what the mandate is about, is protected

1883
04:32:19,500 --> 04:32:26,560
at that 40KW, but it's again, it's a policy decision and I don't think we have a strong feeling

1884
04:32:26,560 --> 04:32:33,040
either way, but we think generally we had to pick, we would choose five.

1885
04:32:33,700 --> 04:32:38,640
I think Mr. Hong, that's what the concern was just trying to understand where to go with this.

1886
04:32:38,640 --> 04:32:42,540
I didn't want to pre-judge kind of where we go with all of this because there are other things

1887
04:32:42,540 --> 04:32:50,320
happening in this space, so I guess I had no action on five or six, but I was gonna get

1888
04:32:50,320 --> 04:32:51,860
your understanding what you're thinking.

1889
04:32:54,080 --> 04:32:58,180
Yeah, thank you. So yeah, I think a lot of discussion

1890
04:32:58,180 --> 04:33:04,740
going on is a definition of capacity in many different places. So that's why for now, I think

1891
04:33:04,740 --> 04:33:10,780
we can move on quickly. That's why I mentioned that at this point, the gameplay capacity will

1892
04:33:10,780 --> 04:33:17,960
these things faster. So that's why that was my rationale, but if party has a very strong

1893
04:33:17,960 --> 04:33:24,880
position, we can deal with it in a different way, but I think they may take more time,

1894
04:33:26,120 --> 04:33:30,960
and if you don't make a decision on this one, we may have to send it back, or we go to the other

1895
04:33:30,960 --> 04:33:37,220
direction. I don't know how strong utility will react to it. So that's why I try to move it quicker.

1896
04:33:37,220 --> 04:33:41,860
sooner is better than trying to precisely making that final decision.

1897
04:33:42,160 --> 04:33:47,320
Well, that's helpful to me, because I just want to make a seem like we're making a final judgment on where this ends up,

1898
04:33:47,780 --> 04:33:54,160
because a lot of the debate we're going to have is over what should be the technology,

1899
04:33:54,300 --> 04:34:02,340
and how would you discern the technology and what is available to the grid versus to help behind the meter.

1900
04:34:02,540 --> 04:34:05,420
A little bit of discussion kind of where we're having up and up or so, you know,

1901
04:34:05,420 --> 04:34:10,380
what are these devices and how are they working and I just don't know if we have a

1902
04:34:10,380 --> 04:34:14,020
we're at the point of final decision but it helps me to know that we're just trying to keep things

1903
04:34:14,020 --> 04:34:17,940
moving fast and that's helpful and not making a final decision.

1904
04:34:24,060 --> 04:34:30,460
Any other questions from commissioners and commissioners, how will you please renew your motion?

1905
04:34:31,340 --> 04:34:36,080
Thank you, Chelsea events. I was just really paid my original draft motion.

1906
04:34:36,080 --> 04:34:48,200
That is 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 16.

1907
04:34:49,960 --> 04:34:50,780
Is there any discussion?

1908
04:34:51,720 --> 04:34:53,260
All in favor, please say aye.

1909
04:34:53,260 --> 04:34:53,740
Aye.

1910
04:34:54,660 --> 04:34:56,580
Opposed, emotion prevails.

1911
04:34:57,580 --> 04:34:58,280
Thank you, everyone.

1912
04:34:59,160 --> 04:34:59,780
That was quick.

1913
04:35:00,000 --> 04:35:04,980
How much work went into that? We appreciate it very much.

1914
04:35:26,500 --> 04:35:30,940
MPRP, any just sent it? The MPRP?

1915
04:35:33,500 --> 04:35:41,860
Oh, no, this is the preliminary packet, so it's not the whole thing.

1916
04:35:41,860 --> 04:35:42,260
Okay.

1917
04:35:45,880 --> 04:35:48,720
Yeah, I was supposed to be the next week I think I got it.

1918
04:36:10,620 --> 04:36:16,300
Ms. Brown-Hus, please introduce our last agenda item for us.

1919
04:36:19,240 --> 04:36:20,900
Good afternoon, Chair C. Ben and Commissioners.

1920
04:36:21,120 --> 04:36:31,580
Item number six is, is docket P407 405 DTL26-266 and the matter of frontier communications

1921
04:36:31,580 --> 04:36:37,760
of Minnesota and citizens telecommunications company of Minnesota LLC for approval of the

1922
04:36:37,760 --> 04:36:40,080
proposed customer transition plan.

1923
04:36:40,820 --> 04:36:51,480
The question before the commission is, how should the commission proceed with frontier communications of Minnesota and citizens telecommunications company of Minnesota's proposed customer transition plan petition.

1924
04:36:52,420 --> 04:37:00,780
A late file letter was received from volunteer communications on August 18 and Commissioner Tuma filed new and revised decision options on August 18.

1925
04:37:01,860 --> 04:37:07,940
Yesterday, Wednesday, staff filed revised decision options, hard copies of the compiled

1926
04:37:07,940 --> 04:37:10,960
late-filed decision options are available in the back of the room.

1927
04:37:11,300 --> 04:37:13,940
I have no further remarks, but I am available for questions.

1928
04:37:14,300 --> 04:37:15,420
Thank you.

1929
04:37:17,820 --> 04:37:22,680
And Ms. Brownhust, we weren't, we're going to have opening statements from parties, or maybe

1930
04:37:22,680 --> 04:37:30,020
just ask them, sorry, I didn't have a note here, so if the parties can come forward, we'll

1931
04:37:30,020 --> 04:37:40,640
begin with please, if you could identify yourselves and then state your preferred decision options

1932
04:37:40,640 --> 04:37:47,800
given the late filed ones, that would be helpful.

1933
04:38:00,550 --> 04:38:01,790
Who would like to begin?

1934
04:38:02,170 --> 04:38:02,730
Mr. Barlow.

1935
04:38:05,340 --> 04:38:05,820
Thank you, Chair.

1936
04:38:06,080 --> 04:38:09,060
My name is Ryan Barlow from the law firm of Cozen, O'Connor.

1937
04:38:09,820 --> 04:38:11,640
I'm representing Frontier in Citizens.

1938
04:38:12,180 --> 04:38:18,740
Also, today, representing the same group is Dan Khan, from the law firm of WVK, he's available

1939
04:38:18,740 --> 04:38:19,200
remotely.

1940
04:38:20,060 --> 04:38:24,140
In addition, we have Paul Vazington from Verizon, the parent of Frontier in Citizens.

1941
04:38:26,920 --> 04:38:28,800
Good afternoon, chair seat in this one.

1942
04:38:28,940 --> 04:38:29,720
It's really loud.

1943
04:38:30,000 --> 04:38:34,400
I'm going to back up Catherine Hinderley on behalf of the Office of the Attorney General

1944
04:38:34,400 --> 04:38:36,060
Residential Utilities Division.

1945
04:38:39,710 --> 04:38:49,310
Amber at Hundell, representing the Department of Commerce, and sorry, I don't have everybody's

1946
04:38:49,310 --> 04:38:56,430
name in front of me, but the folks online who are representing parties, I can't see

1947
04:38:56,430 --> 04:39:01,010
your names, if you could each identify yourself, selves.

1948
04:39:02,250 --> 04:39:06,830
My camera's not working, unfortunately, this is Carson Tracquist, and the President of Local

1949
04:39:06,830 --> 04:39:09,050
72, 70 communication workers in America.

1950
04:39:09,610 --> 04:39:14,070
I represent the Telecom technicians in southern and western Minnesota.

1951
04:39:15,570 --> 04:39:16,130
Good

1952
04:39:19,140 --> 04:39:19,860
afternoon, Karen.

1953
04:39:20,740 --> 04:39:22,240
Go ahead, Dan.

1954
04:39:22,480 --> 04:39:24,120
Good afternoon, Karen commissioners.

1955
04:39:24,240 --> 04:39:27,540
My name is Dan Khan of the law firm, Wilkinson Barker-Nauer.

1956
04:39:28,180 --> 04:39:30,820
And I'm here on behalf of Frontier and Citizens.

1957
04:39:35,150 --> 04:39:36,710
And I'm Paul Vasington.

1958
04:39:37,070 --> 04:39:41,330
Last name is spelled Viesin Victor, AS, ING, T-O-N.

1959
04:39:41,330 --> 04:39:47,370
Senior Director of Regulatory and Government Affairs with Verizon, which is the parent company now

1960
04:39:47,370 --> 04:39:55,230
of the frontier in citizens. Okay, and just for clarification, Mr. Barlow will be your primary

1961
04:39:55,230 --> 04:39:59,790
spokesperson for both you, Mr. Con, and you, Mr. Bassington.

1962
04:40:01,640 --> 04:40:02,120
Okay.

1963
04:40:04,960 --> 04:40:14,380
Is there anybody else we missed? Okay. Then Mr. Barlow, please comment on the decision options.

1964
04:40:15,560 --> 04:40:20,720
Thank you, Chair. Commissioners, I hope you had an opportunity to review our letter that we filed a few days ago.

1965
04:40:21,060 --> 04:40:25,940
We filed it in the hopes of narrowing the issues that needed to be resolved at this procedural hearing.

1966
04:40:25,940 --> 04:40:33,840
We continue to recommend the decision options outlined in there, which would be the modified version of eight that we provided, and

1967
04:40:33,840 --> 04:40:36,520
7, 9, and 10, and

1968
04:40:36,520 --> 04:40:40,440
With that package were comfortable with decision option 2 as well.

1969
04:40:44,090 --> 04:40:45,130
And miss Hinerley.

1970
04:40:46,610 --> 04:40:47,410
Thank you chair Stephen.

1971
04:40:47,970 --> 04:40:54,890
The OIG is supportive of modified Tuma 2, modified Tuma 4, and modified Tuma 7 both A and B.

1972
04:40:57,730 --> 04:40:58,670
And for the department.

1973
04:40:59,510 --> 04:41:08,310
Thank you, Chair Steven, the Department supports modified Tuma 2, modified Tuma 4, and modified Tuma 7A and B.

1974
04:41:10,210 --> 04:41:11,530
Mr. Turnquist.

1975
04:41:13,250 --> 04:41:14,390
Yes, ma'am.

1976
04:41:15,750 --> 04:41:22,030
I have not seen yesterday's publications, so I can't really speak educated on it.

1977
04:41:22,030 --> 04:41:24,310
Okay, no problem.

1978
04:41:25,770 --> 04:41:30,830
Commissioner Tuma, why don't we turn to you then for first-for questions to the parties?

1979
04:41:31,170 --> 04:41:37,190
Yeah, let's start with if you put up the statute, I just wanted to walk through it with Mr.

1980
04:41:38,390 --> 04:41:39,850
Mr. Barlow.

1981
04:41:40,250 --> 04:41:49,010
Understanding this is novel and we're starting it and I appreciate how you laid out your decision option.

1982
04:41:49,010 --> 04:41:55,430
And I just wanted to be clear kind of how I'm proceeding in my mind at looking at this statute.

1983
04:41:56,730 --> 04:41:59,370
And what was critical to convey, the statute is pretty simple.

1984
04:41:59,490 --> 04:42:01,190
We're just trying to assist copper.

1985
04:42:01,970 --> 04:42:05,150
That's only people that are going to be named to your copper people.

1986
04:42:05,330 --> 04:42:10,010
We're still on copper, gramma, people who just haven't got rid of their copper lines.

1987
04:42:11,950 --> 04:42:17,010
And we're trying to mitigate them to broadband, or maybe wireless, that's what I was trying

1988
04:42:17,010 --> 04:42:23,150
to get myself around and it's basically to get that you get out of obligation to serve.

1989
04:42:24,190 --> 04:42:26,770
There is a change in the telecom world.

1990
04:42:26,810 --> 04:42:28,930
We got it to opportunity to be with Mr.

1991
04:42:29,410 --> 04:42:33,690
Mr. Forney at a day and he has seen it all from the beginning to the end.

1992
04:42:33,870 --> 04:42:36,630
And so we're in this transition of moving it.

1993
04:42:36,630 --> 04:42:40,870
And central to that is the definition of alternative provider.

1994
04:42:41,170 --> 04:42:43,050
It seems to be critical to our state statute.

1995
04:42:43,050 --> 04:42:52,270
And so I put it up here, I'll turn to provider, is one or more providers, the federal communications

1996
04:42:52,270 --> 04:42:55,710
has identified through the broadband data collection.

1997
04:42:55,930 --> 04:43:02,710
And so I delved into that, if you could go to the next slide, I gave you Lanna on this.

1998
04:43:03,030 --> 04:43:05,770
And so I try to understand what that was.

1999
04:43:06,630 --> 04:43:11,550
And so here it is, FCC has this document.

2000
04:43:12,050 --> 04:43:17,690
this is right on the FCC website, it's 4597 the Lancy Court. I don't know if I want to

2001
04:43:17,690 --> 04:43:22,730
announce that too much, but that might be a goofy Bohemian who's working on a shed in this

2002
04:43:22,730 --> 04:43:31,030
backyard and if you could just kind of scroll its zoom in on the right-hand side. This is data

2003
04:43:31,030 --> 04:43:36,710
that the FCC has been collecting. Scroll down so you can see all the providers that that goofy

2004
04:43:36,710 --> 04:43:44,690
Bohemian would have potential that say they can serve us and so this is data that is being

2005
04:43:44,690 --> 04:43:48,610
collected by the FCC has been collected over the years I think in part to start getting

2006
04:43:48,610 --> 04:43:55,070
to this transition Mr. Barlow and I see that I have obviously I have my son would not

2007
04:43:55,070 --> 04:44:02,250
let me get off of the spectrum because I get a thousand down and 35 up okay everybody else

2008
04:44:02,250 --> 04:44:08,530
not even close. But their fixed wireless, some of them satellite, I have a few that would

2009
04:44:08,530 --> 04:44:17,570
qualify. So go back to the statute. And so what the statute for providers says that

2010
04:44:17,570 --> 04:44:23,530
successor data for a wire line, broad base access service through fiber,

2011
04:44:23,530 --> 04:44:33,610
after optic cable to the home, 25 down, 3 up, and then there's 120% of the cost.

2012
04:44:34,290 --> 04:44:41,270
So this data is essentially out there of all these providers that I could qualify for.

2013
04:44:41,790 --> 04:44:48,130
And if I still was on copper, for Eisen, who was my provider, could come to me and say,

2014
04:44:48,990 --> 04:44:59,970
We're going to take you off and you have charter there, and or expect them now, and so you would be, you know, you'd be someone who qualified to be removed.

2015
04:45:00,000 --> 04:45:14,220
We move from the copper system. But then there was this or that caused me a little bit of confusion, and I want you to clarify, is or a request by a telephone company or a telecommunication carrier,

2016
04:45:16,360 --> 04:45:25,700
the federal communication has a debt approved adequate replacement provider who meets the requirements of this section.

2017
04:45:25,700 --> 04:45:34,720
And if I'm reading that statute correctly, Mr. Barlow, if I didn't have a spectrum, I would

2018
04:45:34,720 --> 04:45:42,980
still, if one of those providers requested to be named, and I'll turn it to providers,

2019
04:45:43,440 --> 04:45:46,780
which is critical to the statute, that's all you have to give people notice them.

2020
04:45:47,000 --> 04:45:54,240
If one of them would notify you that they were wanting to be an alternative provider in your

2021
04:45:54,240 --> 04:46:00,160
plan, okay? Then I could still, even though I don't have spectrum, I could still then would

2022
04:46:00,160 --> 04:46:05,060
be a copper person who could essentially lose my copper service under the plant. Is that

2023
04:46:05,060 --> 04:46:07,140
a fair interpretation of how this works?

2024
04:46:08,300 --> 04:46:12,460
Thank you Chair Commissioner Tuma. Yes, I think I agree with everything that you said. I just

2025
04:46:12,460 --> 04:46:18,520
want to provide one clarification. Our petition is based entirely on part two of that statute.

2026
04:46:19,140 --> 04:46:24,140
We have filed a simultaneous petition with the FCC asking for approval as an adequate

2027
04:46:24,140 --> 04:46:30,360
replacement, certain locations in Minnesota and in another other states as well. When the FCC

2028
04:46:30,360 --> 04:46:35,940
approved that, it will satisfy the requirements of provision to for those locations.

2029
04:46:37,100 --> 04:46:42,360
And so that's what I'm getting my head around. You can stay right there because I'm struggling

2030
04:46:43,100 --> 04:46:50,380
with our responsibility because you filed an petition. If you look at my new two, okay Mr. Barlow,

2031
04:46:51,280 --> 04:46:54,360
Those words should look very familiar to you.

2032
04:46:54,800 --> 04:46:59,160
I just took your first paragraph of your petition and I put it in a decision option.

2033
04:47:00,260 --> 04:47:04,380
It's your application to us under a state statute.

2034
04:47:05,340 --> 04:47:07,840
And so I'm trying to apply that state statute.

2035
04:47:08,660 --> 04:47:11,420
And when I read that state statute, one of the requirements,

2036
04:47:11,600 --> 04:47:16,940
the customer transition plan is clearly identify the alternative providers

2037
04:47:16,940 --> 04:47:28,800
to customers in the affected area. It did say just one. It doesn't say all either. Okay, but I think it applies all who have

2038
04:47:28,800 --> 04:47:40,460
requested. And so even though you may want to get that approved by the FCC, if Starlink or AT&T was 25-3, I mean,

2039
04:47:40,460 --> 04:47:49,000
barely qualifies. Says somewhere we request to be on the alternative provider list. They should

2040
04:47:49,000 --> 04:47:56,040
be on the alternative provider list that you need to make clearly identified for all copper

2041
04:47:56,040 --> 04:48:03,960
customers. That's the way I read this law. Thank you Chair Commissioner. I don't think that's

2042
04:48:03,960 --> 04:48:11,940
how it works in that when you file a petition to the FCC, you only need to file a petition to

2043
04:48:11,940 --> 04:48:17,600
FCC, you're filing a petition with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission under the Minnesota

2044
04:48:17,600 --> 04:48:25,340
statute to 3, 7, 1, 8, 1. That's what I have in front of me now. So I'm reading this

2045
04:48:25,340 --> 04:48:33,200
language and it says a request by a telephone company or by the petition or not by the

2046
04:48:33,200 --> 04:48:42,120
applicant, a company, okay, and I have several companies that would qualify if they want to be an alternative provider.

2047
04:48:42,980 --> 04:48:48,060
So that's what I'm struggling with. I mean, I, this is the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.

2048
04:48:48,300 --> 04:48:52,400
The last place I want to be is FCC, so I've got bless you all that have to do that.

2049
04:48:53,880 --> 04:48:55,320
But thank you, Chair Commissioner, too.

2050
04:48:55,380 --> 04:48:59,660
And if we get a little bit deeper in the FCC stuff, I'm going to call on Mr. Con for support.

2051
04:48:59,660 --> 04:49:01,620
But I think I can answer your question.

2052
04:49:02,100 --> 04:49:05,700
The way that I read this language is when a telephone company

2053
04:49:05,700 --> 04:49:09,020
or a carrier files a request with the FCC

2054
04:49:09,020 --> 04:49:11,560
to be designated as an adequate replacement,

2055
04:49:12,160 --> 04:49:14,380
that's on a location by location basis.

2056
04:49:14,660 --> 04:49:18,560
So this location front here has file the petition

2057
04:49:19,200 --> 04:49:23,120
to be identified our adequate services at that location.

2058
04:49:23,740 --> 04:49:26,920
The only people who will file that are entities

2059
04:49:26,920 --> 04:49:28,740
that are currently providing copper service

2060
04:49:28,740 --> 04:49:35,480
those specific locations. No one else would file an adequate replacement filing for locations

2061
04:49:35,480 --> 04:49:42,460
that which they don't have copper. So what our petition is is that we have we have asked them

2062
04:49:42,460 --> 04:49:47,720
in a solar commission we're saying these are what we anticipate will be our adequate

2063
04:49:47,720 --> 04:49:55,360
replacement approved by the FCC. Under state law those will be alternative providers for which

2064
04:49:55,360 --> 04:49:59,680
We are moving forward and so that's what we have identified in our petition.

2065
04:50:00,780 --> 04:50:23,820
It's hindering. Help me out. I mean, I was reading your stuff. It seems like you think it's a little broader than that. And I can't remember which one, which one. I was a Mr. Turnquist or somebody said, you need to prove it. Let's all. And I'm trying to, you know, I don't think you have to list all providers, but you just, I think you have to do it to all alternative providers in the definition of the statute. That's what I'm seeing, but you correct me if I'm wrong.

2066
04:50:24,440 --> 04:50:38,040
Chair, Stephen, Commissioner Tuma, I would disagree with Mr. Barlas interpretation, because I believe, first off, it would read out that last phrase that you have highlighted in blue, which is meets the requirements of this section.

2067
04:50:38,040 --> 04:50:45,040
So, it might not look like it from the outside, but this statute had a very long and vigorous

2068
04:50:45,040 --> 04:50:49,560
debate behind the scenes of the legislature, and ensuring that the Minnesota Commission

2069
04:50:49,560 --> 04:50:57,600
continued to have some rains on FCC determinations was one of the things that many stakeholders

2070
04:50:57,600 --> 04:51:02,300
felt important to preserve. And what we landed on was meets the requirement of this section,

2071
04:51:02,720 --> 04:51:07,380
so that the Commission could determine, even if it's approved by the FCC, does that meet the

2072
04:51:07,380 --> 04:51:12,180
requirements, you know, that you have highlighted in one, which is off the screen right now,

2073
04:51:12,760 --> 04:51:15,140
about being, you know, 25 down, three up.

2074
04:51:15,400 --> 04:51:21,000
In terms of what information needs to be provided in the petition, or two consumers, I agree.

2075
04:51:21,260 --> 04:51:24,020
It doesn't say alternative providers, singular.

2076
04:51:24,180 --> 04:51:24,980
It doesn't say all.

2077
04:51:25,320 --> 04:51:34,380
And I think the commission has some discretion as the expert in this area to determine what level of alternative providers that it believes is necessary for

2078
04:51:34,380 --> 04:51:40,560
customers who will be losing their telephone service to be provided with so that they

2079
04:51:40,560 --> 04:51:46,660
can continue to have reliable communication in order to call their loved ones access

2080
04:51:46,660 --> 04:51:53,140
911, have their home alarm systems work etc. So I think that you have some discretion

2081
04:51:53,140 --> 04:52:00,940
to determine what breadth alternative providers should be provided by the company.

2082
04:52:00,940 --> 04:52:02,940
if you have from the department or

2083
04:52:04,000 --> 04:52:04,720
Miss Arnold.

2084
04:52:05,520 --> 04:52:06,900
Chair Steven Commissioner Tuma.

2085
04:52:07,420 --> 04:52:09,100
We agree with

2086
04:52:09,100 --> 04:52:11,380
the phrasing that

2087
04:52:11,380 --> 04:52:12,360
Miss Henry provided

2088
04:52:12,940 --> 04:52:14,940
we don't believe that

2089
04:52:15,660 --> 04:52:15,960
the

2090
04:52:16,720 --> 04:52:20,100
every single alternative provider needs to be

2091
04:52:20,100 --> 04:52:23,900
provided and in order to have a complete application here

2092
04:52:23,900 --> 04:52:27,000
but it's within the commission's

2093
04:52:27,000 --> 04:52:29,980
as to the number of alternative providers

2094
04:52:30,540 --> 04:52:37,400
the Department wants to avoid a situation where a lot of that searching for alternative providers

2095
04:52:37,400 --> 04:52:39,060
falls on the customer.

2096
04:52:40,040 --> 04:52:44,440
I don't know what the FCC is intending by their order, but I think our legislature intended

2097
04:52:45,740 --> 04:52:51,800
informed copper customers so that they have the options that are in front of us because it's

2098
04:52:51,800 --> 04:52:55,340
going to get changed to suddenly on them and they need to make a decision otherwise they might

2099
04:52:55,340 --> 04:53:01,400
not be able to call 911 or were the grandkids, I think that was the intent of this statue,

2100
04:53:02,220 --> 04:53:08,900
as I read it and I agree with you on that. I'm not going to delve too far because we're

2101
04:53:08,900 --> 04:53:14,900
pretty exhausted already if you have a determined that. But I do want to talk a little bit about

2102
04:53:14,900 --> 04:53:24,460
process and so what I tried to do with four Mr. Marlow was to create a flexible process

2103
04:53:26,520 --> 04:53:36,560
for the parties to sit down before September 11th or September 10th I should say, and figure

2104
04:53:36,560 --> 04:53:39,360
out what information needs to be in the record.

2105
04:53:39,780 --> 04:53:44,940
I don't know whether there is trade secret information in that, but I think what I was

2106
04:53:44,940 --> 04:53:50,160
trying to create here, because I do give you a chance to explain if you don't agree with

2107
04:53:50,160 --> 04:53:52,260
some of this and you've tried to explain some of it already.

2108
04:53:52,260 --> 04:53:55,360
But this is preliminary, we're just setting up a process.

2109
04:53:55,720 --> 04:54:03,480
And so what I thought by doing the modified four is that I'm hoping that you all can sit down.

2110
04:54:03,520 --> 04:54:10,840
And that's the next question I'm going to ask you to sit down and kind of get the scope of what the discovery is going to be and what it's going to look like.

2111
04:54:11,360 --> 04:54:13,460
If it gets into trade secret, we got a process.

2112
04:54:14,180 --> 04:54:19,540
Okay? If Mr. Ternquist wants to be a party and an intervener, I would hope you include him in this discussion now.

2113
04:54:19,540 --> 04:54:22,700
But I would encourage him to be intervened in this.

2114
04:54:23,180 --> 04:54:27,000
I was trying to find a short way of doing it, but our attorneys very well.

2115
04:54:27,140 --> 04:54:29,920
Corrected me that I couldn't do a shortcut on interveners.

2116
04:54:30,080 --> 04:54:32,000
They have to petition and anybody could object.

2117
04:54:33,060 --> 04:54:37,220
So I would hope the workers join as a party.

2118
04:54:37,940 --> 04:54:40,780
But so Mr. Barrelow, I put number four in there.

2119
04:54:40,820 --> 04:54:45,440
I know you had number eight and you wanted to kind of get onto your list of things you wanted to provide.

2120
04:54:45,820 --> 04:54:49,060
But I think I want to have at least you have a discussion with these folks.

2121
04:54:49,060 --> 04:54:55,300
Maybe your list is the list. I did a side-by-side. There's a few things I probably wouldn't have added that I'd like

2122
04:54:55,300 --> 04:54:59,960
But there's but I kind of want you to have a conversation. So before Labor Day, are you willing to sit down?

2123
04:55:00,000 --> 04:55:09,620
With the parties and the workers to identify a discovery process that you can tell us what it's going to be by September 10.

2124
04:55:11,690 --> 04:55:22,750
Thank you, Chair Commissioner Tuma. Commissioner Tuma, I have to say I'm trying to catch up because what you've just described as a match with the filing process that I see outlined in option 4.

2125
04:55:23,030 --> 04:55:28,250
If you're asking us if we'll sit down and have a conversation with my colleagues at the department and the OIG, we're happy to do that.

2126
04:55:28,250 --> 04:55:31,390
we've already met with them, on this case, we're going to continue to be engaged.

2127
04:55:33,450 --> 04:55:41,010
What the language here looks like to me is that we would make a filing, and I can represent

2128
04:55:41,010 --> 04:55:45,750
that the information that we would provide is the information that we've listed in our

2129
04:55:45,750 --> 04:55:52,070
modified decision-option aid, and then it's not clear to me what would happen next, but

2130
04:55:52,070 --> 04:55:57,130
if that turns into an extended dispute with multiple rounds of filings and we're still

2131
04:55:58,710 --> 04:56:18,090
That's my concern, okay, Mr. Barlow, is I'm trying to give you an opportunity. Yes, you're to file something, but my hope is that you sit down with with your folks and say, look, I agree with you on this, but I can modify it by this and you have a conversation on September 10. We're flying. We're on our way.

2132
04:56:19,270 --> 04:56:23,710
Question or two, but we're happy to have that conversation. I just want to be real direct though.

2133
04:56:23,710 --> 04:56:26,850
I don't know that we're going to reach an agreement that's going to resolve the objection

2134
04:56:26,850 --> 04:56:31,510
and then we'll come back here and try to figure it out because we're trying to do this

2135
04:56:31,510 --> 04:56:32,150
expedited.

2136
04:56:32,290 --> 04:56:37,070
So in other words, it's not in front of an ALJ, it's going to have to come back to us in

2137
04:56:37,070 --> 04:56:49,990
some fashion and I'm trying to speed things up so I'm not too excited about what I'm hearing,

2138
04:56:49,990 --> 04:56:51,930
but Mr. Newly, okay, trying to sit down

2139
04:56:51,930 --> 04:56:55,390
and see if you can work out a discovery process

2140
04:56:55,390 --> 04:56:56,750
so that you can get the information

2141
04:56:56,750 --> 04:57:00,570
you need to be able to analyze this filing.

2142
04:57:01,110 --> 04:57:02,830
Yeah, chair Stephen, Commissioner Tuma,

2143
04:57:03,010 --> 04:57:05,610
I'm a little troubled by Mr. Barlow's pessimism.

2144
04:57:06,050 --> 04:57:07,910
I think that our intention here,

2145
04:57:07,990 --> 04:57:11,550
certainly as the OIG, is not to be

2146
04:57:11,550 --> 04:57:15,110
in any way disruptive of trying to meet the goals

2147
04:57:15,110 --> 04:57:18,130
of 271-81, which frankly are very similar

2148
04:57:18,130 --> 04:57:21,310
to the goals of the FCC's network modernization order.

2149
04:57:21,970 --> 04:57:24,430
It's to allow companies to exit copper

2150
04:57:24,430 --> 04:57:27,530
in a way that is safe and preserves essential services

2151
04:57:27,530 --> 04:57:29,330
for people who don't have an adequate alternative.

2152
04:57:30,070 --> 04:57:31,650
I think I know from the OIG's perspective,

2153
04:57:32,150 --> 04:57:33,830
we are very willing to think creatively

2154
04:57:34,550 --> 04:57:38,010
about how we can most efficiently get people

2155
04:57:38,010 --> 04:57:40,710
the information they need and get us

2156
04:57:40,710 --> 04:57:43,010
and the Department of Commerce the information we need

2157
04:57:43,010 --> 04:57:46,950
to ensure that folks have an adequate alternative.

2158
04:57:49,310 --> 04:57:53,490
I hope that Verizon is willing to work with us on that.

2159
04:57:54,690 --> 04:57:59,070
I think that none of us want to be in a situation where we might be in several months if this is going slowly.

2160
04:57:59,790 --> 04:58:04,830
So we certainly understand our obligations to try to get this to work.

2161
04:58:05,110 --> 04:58:09,850
And I hope that Verizon considers very strongly that we are willing to work with them.

2162
04:58:10,050 --> 04:58:14,110
And we don't want a situation of this dragging on for a long time either.

2163
04:58:14,110 --> 04:58:26,990
So, I hope that they will reconsider working with us to get us the information we need rather than insisting on modified decision option 8 if we meet and to prolonging dispute about this.

2164
04:58:26,990 --> 04:58:28,470
This Raymond and his dad.

2165
04:58:31,040 --> 04:58:38,260
Chair Seaman Commissioner Tuma, the department is more than happy to discuss further with Frontier.

2166
04:58:39,020 --> 04:58:40,500
And then Mr. Tranquist,

2167
04:58:42,960 --> 04:58:47,100
if Mr. Commissioner Tuma, I agree with a lot of what you're stating.

2168
04:58:47,540 --> 04:58:53,720
My biggest concern is most frontier customers other than the south metro of the Twin Cities are rural customers.

2169
04:58:54,260 --> 04:58:58,360
Where the reason they're still on our DSL and our voice services is because it's the only option.

2170
04:58:59,360 --> 04:59:05,220
I guess what I would like to see if possible is just a little more of a plan, what's going to happen with those customers

2171
04:59:05,220 --> 04:59:08,180
because cellular is not an option in some of those locations.

2172
04:59:10,180 --> 04:59:15,360
The minister, I don't know if you can see your TBI or your screen, but if you could

2173
04:59:15,360 --> 04:59:22,140
put up the number 11 that I drafted I, as I was working to try to figure out how to get

2174
04:59:22,140 --> 04:59:32,580
you in the process, Mr. Turnquist, I think it's best that you become a party and so because

2175
04:59:32,580 --> 04:59:39,220
this is an expedited. We don't have an ALJ to make decisions. I thought I would empower the

2176
04:59:39,220 --> 04:59:45,620
executive secretary to approve or deny intervention petitions. This is meant to accommodate you

2177
04:59:46,600 --> 04:59:53,640
if you want to become a party. And so I would encourage you to become a party. And so I just

2178
04:59:53,640 --> 04:59:58,360
wanted to hear from you whether you would be willing to do that. And I think I would then encourage

2179
05:00:00,000 --> 05:00:04,340
Parties here to include you on the discussions. So let me know your thoughts.

2180
05:00:05,460 --> 05:00:10,580
I'm happy to help. I mean, as a technician at 30 years with this company, I understand that technology

2181
05:00:10,580 --> 05:00:16,840
has changed. I mean, it's not the same world it was then. I just want to make sure that our customers are

2182
05:00:16,840 --> 05:00:24,720
treated fairly as we transition. And so if you need any help, but for certainly contact our staff,

2183
05:00:24,920 --> 05:00:29,520
and they'll help you to file it's nothing very complicated to file the petition to intervene.

2184
05:00:30,000 --> 05:00:33,960
And we'll make sure that you're included in our semester bar,

2185
05:00:34,140 --> 05:00:38,800
although even though you're not seeing much space in the discussions,

2186
05:00:39,120 --> 05:00:43,420
you're okay having Mr. Turnquist in those discussions early on here.

2187
05:00:43,780 --> 05:00:44,080
Are you doing?

2188
05:00:45,820 --> 05:00:47,540
Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Tuma.

2189
05:00:47,640 --> 05:00:49,720
I mean, we're happy to communicate with the CWA.

2190
05:00:50,360 --> 05:00:53,700
I can't confirm what position we take if they try to intervene.

2191
05:00:53,900 --> 05:00:55,180
This is not a contested case.

2192
05:00:55,260 --> 05:00:58,600
So intervention doesn't have the same process or steps

2193
05:00:58,600 --> 05:00:59,940
that it would in a different proceeding.

2194
05:01:01,560 --> 05:01:03,700
But I'm sorry, I don't know if I missed it,

2195
05:01:03,780 --> 05:01:06,100
but I feel like I'm just seeing a lot of things

2196
05:01:06,100 --> 05:01:07,620
because I just drafted to you.

2197
05:01:10,060 --> 05:01:12,380
So yes, you have a right to object, I'm not saying,

2198
05:01:12,580 --> 05:01:14,060
but I would hope that you would include them

2199
05:01:14,060 --> 05:01:15,400
in your discussions early on.

2200
05:01:15,460 --> 05:01:17,040
Again, we're trying to move expeditiously.

2201
05:01:17,260 --> 05:01:19,180
I want you of all the people here.

2202
05:01:19,480 --> 05:01:22,420
I'm for dereg, I've ever been a very clear one

2203
05:01:22,420 --> 05:01:24,080
for every dereg bill in my life.

2204
05:01:24,800 --> 05:01:28,480
So, but I have an obligation, bad decision to.

2205
05:01:28,480 --> 05:01:36,360
But I have an obligation under the statute here to make sure we are following the statute carefully.

2206
05:01:36,760 --> 05:01:37,480
And so that's.

2207
05:01:38,460 --> 05:01:39,460
I'm pretty much worried.

2208
05:01:39,700 --> 05:01:40,780
I need to be madam chair.

2209
05:01:41,000 --> 05:01:42,260
So I'm happy to to make.

2210
05:01:42,900 --> 05:01:46,180
I was really happy with where you're going until that last comment.

2211
05:01:46,460 --> 05:01:51,760
I'm going to share two on because I think your comment about being for D reg is.

2212
05:01:52,800 --> 05:01:57,060
And maybe I'm riffing a little bit off a Mr. Turnquist here.

2213
05:01:57,060 --> 05:02:04,700
But, Mr. Turngoyce, I think you understand better than I do certainly that, you know,

2214
05:02:04,820 --> 05:02:12,540
we have the statute that was passed by the legislature and we have to do our best to

2215
05:02:14,020 --> 05:02:19,800
effectuate what the legislature told us to do. But to Commissioner Tumas and I know you didn't

2216
05:02:19,800 --> 05:02:31,900
see it, new modified for, I think the importance of having CWA involved is finding that is helping

2217
05:02:31,900 --> 05:02:39,800
the commission determine that the filing requirements that are required under the statute

2218
05:02:39,800 --> 05:02:48,560
are robust enough for the public and your workers to be able to understand. That's one string

2219
05:02:48,560 --> 05:02:57,480
that we really do have control over at least and so I really like the way this is headed

2220
05:02:57,480 --> 05:03:05,240
or you're modified for it is headed and to Mr. Barlow like I sort of understand what

2221
05:03:05,240 --> 05:03:12,820
you're saying but you know earlier and I know I appreciate that the companies are willing

2222
05:03:12,820 --> 05:03:18,600
to work with parties on the process that's laid out.

2223
05:03:19,360 --> 05:03:24,620
But from my view, if you ask the questions and the other ones

2224
05:03:24,620 --> 05:03:28,740
of the public that and get the information out there,

2225
05:03:29,000 --> 05:03:30,700
that's going to help the commission

2226
05:03:31,680 --> 05:03:36,540
affectuate the statute in the way that you're wine us to do anyway.

2227
05:03:36,540 --> 05:03:47,990
so I think it's incumbent on the telephone companies to work with the parties here for the actual

2228
05:03:50,350 --> 05:03:55,310
meetings that will take place that will help inform the public about the new law.

2229
05:03:55,910 --> 05:04:03,010
And so maybe I'm picking a scape here that we can move over, but

2230
05:04:03,010 --> 05:04:09,330
Tell me again what's wrong with modified tumor four that you're not real come for with?

2231
05:04:10,110 --> 05:04:16,030
Thank you chair. I think is it because the infre because it's the is it the first part about finding the

2232
05:04:16,030 --> 05:04:17,010
petition incomplete

2233
05:04:17,930 --> 05:04:18,970
or no

2234
05:04:18,970 --> 05:04:22,230
Think it's here. Um, I have several concerns with

2235
05:04:22,230 --> 05:04:25,370
204 the first one is yes. We feel that our petition is complete

2236
05:04:25,370 --> 05:04:32,750
Please, I'm sorry. I'm not trying to argue, but I am but the way I read it or talked about it with staff was that

2237
05:04:33,850 --> 05:04:45,030
Part of your petition still includes the outreach plan to the public to inform them about the other options that are available to customers.

2238
05:04:45,370 --> 05:04:57,310
Is it not? And so that's how I read Tuma New 4 that we're still in that process of determining the notice requirements to the public.

2239
05:04:57,930 --> 05:04:59,970
that's what you're going to work out with them.

2240
05:05:00,000 --> 05:05:09,500
Other parties, and then we'll move through the docket that will help us determine whether the petition

2241
05:05:09,500 --> 05:05:11,820
should be granted in the end.

2242
05:05:13,140 --> 05:05:18,600
Thank you, Chair. I think I understand what you're asking my apologies if I miss. We feel that our

2243
05:05:18,600 --> 05:05:24,220
petition is complete. We have agreed to provide some of the additional information that's

2244
05:05:24,220 --> 05:05:29,120
requested. We don't necessarily think that was required to have a complete petition, but we're willing to

2245
05:05:29,120 --> 05:05:35,080
it. The things that we've left off our list are the things that would be burdensome, or that

2246
05:05:35,080 --> 05:05:40,100
would be more relevant to a decision about whether our technology is an adequate replacement.

2247
05:05:41,140 --> 05:05:45,760
And so that's where our focus is, that's a decision that's going to be made by the FCC.

2248
05:05:47,120 --> 05:05:52,860
And so that information isn't needed here and what we want to make sure that this is focused on

2249
05:05:52,860 --> 05:05:58,380
the customer transition plan, which we're here to cooperate with the commission on doing the customer

2250
05:05:58,380 --> 05:06:03,740
transition plan, but not in approving the discontinuance, which is a decision that will be made by the FCC.

2251
05:06:04,700 --> 05:06:11,080
So my primary concern with the modified four, that is that in combination with modified seven,

2252
05:06:11,460 --> 05:06:15,380
it's creating an awful lot of process, steps that might require, they're going to add

2253
05:06:15,380 --> 05:06:21,160
comment periods, they're going to have us back at the commission for every disagreement, and that that's

2254
05:06:21,160 --> 05:06:27,340
going to add time. And once the FCC approves discontinuance, which we expect is going to happen

2255
05:06:27,340 --> 05:06:29,780
relatively quickly, possibly tomorrow,

2256
05:06:32,160 --> 05:06:34,740
anything that inhibits us from moving forward with that

2257
05:06:34,740 --> 05:06:40,400
is a potential problem that we just don't think is necessary to work through today. We think

2258
05:06:40,400 --> 05:06:45,960
that the package we've outlined gets us moving forward. It avoids a very challenging discussion

2259
05:06:45,960 --> 05:06:52,340
that we don't need to have about legal issues. Whereas I'm concerned that this puts us on a path

2260
05:06:52,340 --> 05:06:58,240
to have that legal discussion, not necessarily today, but to have it when we might not need

2261
05:06:58,240 --> 05:06:59,140
to have it at all.

2262
05:06:59,980 --> 05:07:04,860
I don't know what legal discussion he's worried about having, because I have an obligation

2263
05:07:04,860 --> 05:07:11,780
under a petition, you filed, you know, you filed this petition under Minnesota statute.

2264
05:07:12,460 --> 05:07:17,240
I have an obligation under Minnesota law if you're going to disconnect copper customers that

2265
05:07:17,240 --> 05:07:21,940
you used to have a state required, I mean I know there's a federal requirement, but there's

2266
05:07:21,940 --> 05:07:28,680
requirement that you provide service to. And so now we're going to not provide service and we want to make sure that they have full notice.

2267
05:07:29,340 --> 05:07:34,040
I don't care whether I discontinue or have to make a discontinue decision. I don't care about that.

2268
05:07:34,500 --> 05:07:45,540
I have to apply 8181. That's what I'm most to do. And that is I need to lecture everybody knows who their adequate providers are.

2269
05:07:45,540 --> 05:07:45,960
Okay.

2270
05:07:46,440 --> 05:07:49,220
How we establish what adequate providers are.

2271
05:07:49,680 --> 05:07:52,900
All of that information is what our state statute requires.

2272
05:07:53,180 --> 05:07:54,300
I don't know what the feds are doing.

2273
05:07:54,460 --> 05:07:55,100
I don't care.

2274
05:07:55,620 --> 05:07:57,020
I have a petition you filed.

2275
05:07:57,640 --> 05:07:59,100
And so I think it's pretty clear.

2276
05:07:59,240 --> 05:08:01,500
And I think the department's in the,

2277
05:08:01,500 --> 05:08:03,360
in the, in the OIG thing is clear.

2278
05:08:03,920 --> 05:08:05,780
This is the process we get there.

2279
05:08:06,000 --> 05:08:08,800
I can't help you that if you disagree,

2280
05:08:09,440 --> 05:08:11,180
we had a created decision process.

2281
05:08:11,260 --> 05:08:13,560
If we're not going to go in front of an ALJ, it's us.

2282
05:08:13,560 --> 05:08:19,740
I'm trying to speed it up by giving our executive secretary some authority, but I want to be

2283
05:08:19,740 --> 05:08:25,220
also careful there because this is the first time we've dealt with this, okay, and so if we're

2284
05:08:25,220 --> 05:08:29,080
going to deal with it the first time we want to make sure we do it right instead of good

2285
05:08:29,080 --> 05:08:33,820
precedent. And so that's what I'm trying to make sure I'm balancing here. It's not nothing too

2286
05:08:33,820 --> 05:08:40,820
tricky about it. So when you're ready, I can have my promotion, but Commissioner Sullivan.

2287
05:08:40,820 --> 05:08:45,720
that was that was helpful kosher to it. I guess Mr. Bala like the statute

2288
05:08:45,720 --> 05:08:51,340
two thirty seven point one eight one. Isn't that a statute that the telecom industry

2289
05:08:51,340 --> 05:08:52,800
brought to the legislature?

2290
05:08:55,850 --> 05:08:57,010
Thank you to your commissioners all of

2291
05:08:57,010 --> 05:09:01,050
then I think so, but I have to say I was not a person. I know the answer is it is.

2292
05:09:01,750 --> 05:09:06,410
So I just hit that was right. But I like I guess I'm sorry. Commissioner, I do

2293
05:09:06,410 --> 05:09:10,770
just need to say that since that statute was passed, the FCC has taken a very

2294
05:09:10,770 --> 05:09:17,090
significant action and has set, you know, put pretty significant things in an order that

2295
05:09:17,090 --> 05:09:22,990
state laws that interfere with the FCC's authority to approve discontinuance of mis-gerestictional

2296
05:09:22,990 --> 05:09:25,150
service are preempted.

2297
05:09:25,350 --> 05:09:30,090
I want to be clear, we did not recommend decision-option one that's not what I'm recommending

2298
05:09:30,090 --> 05:09:30,630
today.

2299
05:09:30,810 --> 05:09:32,850
We don't think that conversation is necessary.

2300
05:09:33,330 --> 05:09:39,610
But what we are saying is that 237.81 has to be applied in a way that does not interfere

2301
05:09:39,610 --> 05:09:44,510
with the FCC's jurisdiction, and we think that Commissioner, with all respect, Commissioner,

2302
05:09:44,630 --> 05:09:47,950
to whom we think that your decision options take a step in that direction that's not

2303
05:09:47,950 --> 05:09:51,630
necessary, and then our package would move forward without those concerns.

2304
05:09:51,950 --> 05:09:54,750
You want to know that until there's a final order, so I mean, that's.

2305
05:09:55,070 --> 05:09:58,630
So, I mean, I, Mr. Baalow, you know.

2306
05:10:00,210 --> 05:10:06,510
I am not familiar with the FCC, particular decision that came out that you're referring to.

2307
05:10:07,250 --> 05:10:13,470
I mean, I know that something happened, but I do know that federal agencies are always deferential to state authority.

2308
05:10:15,250 --> 05:10:27,390
And they recognize that there is a nexus between state and federal authority, that it's not always a black and white zone, that it's very gray, and they are always deferential to state authority.

2309
05:10:28,530 --> 05:10:41,670
But they are also, as a federal agency, they always are going to say, well, you know, there is a supremacy clause, and they are going to say, you know, when there's a conflict and it's a clear conflict federal law, you know, of course.

2310
05:10:42,410 --> 05:10:54,450
But that being said, this is a statute that the industry came to the legislature with and no less than a year ago, said they would do this. And now they're saying they'll be not.

2311
05:10:55,090 --> 05:11:01,230
And I just think that feels a little bit like they're playing with, you know, crooked dice.

2312
05:11:02,310 --> 05:11:03,430
Thank you, Chair Commissioner Sullivan.

2313
05:11:03,710 --> 05:11:04,630
You can feel free.

2314
05:11:04,790 --> 05:11:06,790
I know you've already had to do it once.

2315
05:11:09,570 --> 05:11:11,790
With the high-dogen on and go.

2316
05:11:12,910 --> 05:11:16,550
But I mean, like, it just is, I think it stinks.

2317
05:11:17,770 --> 05:11:18,850
Thank you, Chair Commissioner Sullivan.

2318
05:11:18,850 --> 05:11:20,670
I understand the frustration.

2319
05:11:20,670 --> 05:11:25,510
And I do want to reflect, though, like, we filed the petition.

2320
05:11:26,070 --> 05:11:29,990
We did not take the position and we're not taking the position that that statute's ineffective.

2321
05:11:30,830 --> 05:11:35,550
We're here to cooperate with the commission, making sure that customers get the information

2322
05:11:35,550 --> 05:11:36,670
that's required by the statute.

2323
05:11:36,990 --> 05:11:40,950
We think we've done that and we think that some of the extra things that people are asking

2324
05:11:40,950 --> 05:11:44,990
for are really targeted at doing a reevaluation of what's an adequate replacement.

2325
05:11:45,710 --> 05:11:47,970
That's what we're concerned about.

2326
05:11:51,060 --> 05:11:59,080
Thank you, Chair Sivan, so I understand we have to deal with the legal and law, but I think

2327
05:11:59,080 --> 05:12:04,760
however we are talking about potential people's life. The service has a potential impact

2328
05:12:04,760 --> 05:12:10,700
to people's life and personally I was tracking not to happen in the UK transition. There

2329
05:12:10,700 --> 05:12:16,020
was a two year delay plus I think there is a severe penalty for certain company through

2330
05:12:16,020 --> 05:12:17,960
through this potential issue.

2331
05:12:18,160 --> 05:12:20,980
I think that's why your industry was asking

2332
05:12:20,980 --> 05:12:24,100
basically towards to create the law of state law.

2333
05:12:24,700 --> 05:12:26,860
So you guys can avoid that situation.

2334
05:12:28,140 --> 05:12:32,380
Being said, I hope, I think just checking the box

2335
05:12:32,380 --> 05:12:37,740
with the law and exercising federal agencies power.

2336
05:12:37,880 --> 05:12:40,300
I think we have to deal with this one properly.

2337
05:12:41,080 --> 05:12:44,260
Otherwise, today's opportunity discussion

2338
05:12:44,260 --> 05:12:48,840
in politics can become top of why you're a transition problem.

2339
05:12:49,540 --> 05:12:52,240
This can be the front page of every newspaper.

2340
05:12:53,140 --> 05:12:56,560
So that's why I think I commissioned a two-mile saying that we should do it properly.

2341
05:12:57,880 --> 05:13:00,300
So I hope that's the understanding of the industry.

2342
05:13:00,840 --> 05:13:01,580
Thank you, Chair Commissioner.

2343
05:13:01,880 --> 05:13:07,060
I had wanted to have an opportunity to say earlier, but I do want to make clear.

2344
05:13:08,620 --> 05:13:14,100
We are only proposing to discontinue copper service for specific customer locations that

2345
05:13:14,100 --> 05:13:20,400
an approved adequate replacement, which is Verizon Wireless, Verizon Fiber, Verizon Fixed Wireless.

2346
05:13:21,340 --> 05:13:26,420
And we're also committing that no customer is going to get left behind. So if we've got an approval

2347
05:13:26,420 --> 05:13:33,380
for a location for fixed wireless or mobile and our text go out there and the service doesn't connect,

2348
05:13:33,620 --> 05:13:38,700
that person's going to continue to get copper service. We're not disconnecting anyone from

2349
05:13:38,700 --> 05:13:43,820
the connectivity and we've committed to file on September 10th more information about how our

2350
05:13:43,820 --> 05:13:49,220
technology interacts with things like TTY and medical devices and other equipment like that

2351
05:13:49,220 --> 05:13:55,300
where it's critical. We're here to cooperate with the Commission and do this right so that we can get

2352
05:13:55,300 --> 05:13:58,860
customers on better technology and make sure that everybody is connected.

2353
05:14:01,700 --> 05:14:09,420
Mr. Barlow, I think we share the same goal of informing the public and that's why I'm still

2354
05:14:09,420 --> 05:14:15,380
really strongly supportive of Commissioner Tuma's modified for, because it shapes the parameters

2355
05:14:15,380 --> 05:14:21,860
of your customer transition plan and the notification to the customers about what their

2356
05:14:21,860 --> 05:14:22,680
alternative is.

2357
05:14:23,040 --> 05:14:29,320
And so, I mean, I think we're still, we're moving in the direction that the legislature

2358
05:14:29,320 --> 05:14:38,800
told us to hear if the Commissioner Tuma's decision options and, you know, it's going to

2359
05:14:38,800 --> 05:14:50,600
take work on your client's behalf to really work with the department, the CWA and the OIG to

2360
05:14:51,360 --> 05:14:57,560
do that outreach that is required under the law and the necessary information because

2361
05:14:57,560 --> 05:14:59,980
you know, as well as...

2362
05:15:00,000 --> 05:15:13,760
Those of us seeing up here because you used to work at the Commission, the public is going to call not your companies that you're representing now, but they're going to call the public agencies to ask for help with what's happening.

2363
05:15:14,500 --> 05:15:21,940
And so we have a vested interest in making sure that your outreach to these customers is robust and complete.

2364
05:15:21,940 --> 05:15:32,400
So, hopefully that happens and we can agree to disagree on portions of this, but we share

2365
05:15:32,400 --> 05:15:35,820
the same goals and educating the public about their options.

2366
05:15:37,100 --> 05:15:45,480
So Commissioner Tuma, any other questions in your, um, commissioners, any other questions

2367
05:15:45,480 --> 05:15:50,460
in your overall motion or overall, on the docket?

2368
05:15:50,460 --> 05:15:55,300
I guess I just want to ask I'm going to share two of you wants to take back is

2369
05:15:57,020 --> 05:15:58,140
The red comment

2370
05:15:59,460 --> 05:16:04,020
Why I meant I meant I meant that's it. That was it in the lie. Even I

2371
05:16:04,020 --> 05:16:10,580
Even I am with you and following the law. Okay, I would move with two modified two

2372
05:16:13,040 --> 05:16:14,000
modified four

2373
05:16:14,000 --> 05:16:16,380
modified seven and

2374
05:16:17,740 --> 05:16:18,700
the new

2375
05:16:19,380 --> 05:16:25,580
11 to allow for the delegation executive secretary to approve intervenors.

2376
05:16:27,430 --> 05:16:30,670
All in favor of Commissioner Tuma's motion, please say aye.

2377
05:16:32,130 --> 05:16:33,930
Opposed the motion prevails.

2378
05:16:35,130 --> 05:16:35,870
Thank you, everyone.

2379
05:16:36,650 --> 05:16:39,810
There's no other work before the commission were adjourned for the day.

2380
05:16:40,150 --> 05:16:40,690
Well, it's a country.

2381
05:16:41,550 --> 05:16:48,920
There's a federal government that tried to fill the space, but they really did.

2382
05:16:48,920 --> 05:16:50,460
So yeah, that's the good way to go.