Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
weekly notes - April 29th 2022
t. CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS—WEEKLY NOTES for: April 29th,2022 TO: City Council Members& Staff FROM: Eric Johnson,City Administrator Zoning&Development Items: 1. The City has received no new application for the June Planning commission meeting—the deadline is still a couple of weeks out. 2. Golden Crown was asked to remove the stored pontoon boats — see the enclosed letter. The Owner of the NAPA building was also asked remove the pontoon boat storage—latter next week is forthcoming. 3. For the Norell Ave Project - The City has established on its website for all updates-click to: https://tinyurl.com/2s3h834y - - Please also see the enclosed STANTEC Weekly Update for 4/29/22.Other - ------- than some detour updates,... so far so good... image of Norell and STH 36 - - 4. Xcel Energy has infomred the City that it has had pump a failure to the leachate system at the Moelter Fly Ash site—down the big hill...There will be - some above ground temporary pumps and large hose dealing with this stormwater effluent for a a few weeks while new pumps—which were planned for repacement—are secured and installed. 5. The Clty has issued a billing to VSSA/Boutwell's for its annual PILT—Payment k in lieu of taxes fee—Usually around$45,000—see enclosed.This is for the VSSA Care Center.These would otherwise be untaxable.See enclosed. COVID-19 Matters: • This is the Governor's-PORTAL haps://mn.gov/covidl9—Many documents /Exec. Orders can be found. Washington County has initiated a County Dashboard containing more localized COVID-19 Impacts and rates LINK->>HERE. Other Items: Please see the enclosed documents related to the Mayor's testifying at the Senate Tax Committee—related to the transition aid bill crafted by the Coalition of Utility Cities.SF 3641. The Mayor inquired if Staff could watch a hearing by the Public Utilities Commission related to Xcel Energy and other power supplier issues—that link was not working however the data was available and in large part,the matter had only a limited relationship to the issues the Clty has or likely will engage in and was about how power companies must or may process parallel power suppliers(solar) access to the utility grid systems. Obviously,there is a lot of jargon with this matter---but unless the Clty has a pending plan for a solar farm/power distribution—it looks like it is outside our scope.I have attached the DOCKET Information. Mayor McComber Provided "weekly Notes"is an internal/inter-departmental memo 1. N LC Updates for April 23rd limited in scope to share brief updates and information among City Departments,City Consultants and Elected Officials 2. Minnesota Twins—Home Run Lunch regarding various topics. 1 of 30 wt�l City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N. Email:jhultman@cityofoakparkheights.cam Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Direct:651.351.1661 Phone:651.439.4439 April 29, 2022 Owner/Manager Golden Crown Restaurant 14587 60th St. N. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Re: Notice of Violation —Open Storage of Pontoon Boats to Parking Area Dear Owner/Manager: I am writing with regard to the pontoon boats that are currently being stored at the Golden Crown parking lot. The open storage of these boats is not permitted by City Ordinance 401.15.F.7. 401.15.F. Off Street Parking Loading. 7. Required accessory off-street parking spaces in any district shall not be utilized for open storage, sale or rental of goods, repair work, storage of inoperable vehicles, and/or storage of snow. This letter serves as the City's request that the boats be removed from the parking area within ten days of the date of this letter and no later than Monday, May 9 2022. Thank you for your prompt attention. Please contact me with any questions you may have. Sincerely, PLANNING & CODE ENFORCEMENT 1 Jul a uitman Buil ing Official ,/pc: Eric Johnson, City Administrator 2 of 30 r Sta ntec s . i • City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N • Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone (651) 439-4439 • Fax (651) 439-0574 Norell Avenue North Improvements Weekly Project Update #1 For the Week Ending 4/29/2022 What work was completed on the project this week? • The contractor installed the traffic detour on Wednesday. • The old asphalt roadway was pulverized into material that will later be recycled as sand and gravel under the new pavement. • Old concrete curb and gutter was removed. What work is expected for next week? • The Contractor will be installing storm sewer on the North Side of Highway 36 to prepare for signal improvements to be made. They will also be preparing the sidewalks for repaving on the North side of the Highway 36 intersection. • On Norell Avenue, removals will continue, with tree clearing and concrete curb and gutter. When this is finished, excavation will begin for the west portion of the future 59th St intersection. If time allows, the contractor may start storm sewer installation. • Also, private utility companies may be doing work to move existing power, fiberoptic, and cable lines out of the way. Will there be any changes to the traffic detour or access to businesses next week? • No changes are anticipated next week to the traffic detour. The right turn lane for Westbound Highway 36 to Washington Avenue will be closed to allow crews to install storm sewer. Please use caution around this area while crews are onsite. Where can I get more project information? Our main form of communication regarding this project will be updates posted to the City of Oak Park Heights Webpage weekly: https://www.cityofoakparkheights.com under the `Resources' drop- down tab. Or type https://tinyurl.com/2s3h834y in your browser to be taken to the page directly. For general project inquiries, questions and comments: Project Hotline: 612-895-5029 - Leave a message with your name and phone number Or email to - norellconstructionproject@stantec.com 3 of 30 *Is Vag ©d e� J z I � abnen� J JY sw� t S Greeley Si S N any uaas6rypG N Greeley SE 5 z 9 r U 1 � Oakgreen Ave N Dakgreen Avr � oa m�'• m — ca m {{ awiel Blvd Industrial Blvd m N — � J � o W FQ _ > . v �� O g x } O F o� �O z z CD Z LU Z a =_ LU W 1 O NI0Ba W11 11 it �r o" G Y O v d 2 m � nt O y ar p, ono E — —E 0 3 �' E Norwicfi Ave N =�0 © ®► �� v o v v e O VV V ac a V) A ` O J 0. wY j E V) <a O m m V) F O Q O Pse' LIMA"` �. r V1 p c m V) z �C tyw t V) _ a«� w> d GD V �= �o cv z F g N o mMN W Z L N �© J W W 3 N m LU > Norwich Pkvy IE O z N LU W a�+ H Q CDr- W 3 o 01. > Q 3 m O O L L r" � O z L O CD v 3 = M LU Z a or Z W W ~ N Q� O +�+ Ur O O 3 0 Q V O O •CD V 01- .r O M 0 2 N V L 3 3 N L N Q ~ Newgate Pve N N anV alaSnraN Newgate AveN V) M `0 �wCD� 01. $ Q C C �o u = ~ E -e IQ CD L Z CD v O u O CD L C7 o v = F z Q C7 g rr \1 /� Iii �� � ��\1�� i '► � '�� t N�,o/� oe / TI,'ZIIFrF' 6 4 aaz 9 All� jol Alit l -- c U. ! Q Afv rAd� r raASL„ +} C' m� d, i -i r _ r r ``o From: Donkers,Charles A To: Eric Johnson Cc: Peterson. Doualas J;Berrington.Jeff J Subject: King Leachate discharge to sewer Date: Monday,April 25,2022 11:23:47 AM Just a FYI. The pump system failed at the landfill last week, 3 weeks before a new system will be installed. Rather than fixing the old system we will discharge to the sewer using a temporary pump and running an above ground hose to the sewer manhole until the new system is installed.. We have used this approach in the past. We will estimate the volume discharge based upon pump run times. Leachate recharge is low so I expect to run this system 1x/wk and only for a few hours at a time. Someone will be on site when we are pumping and no manholes will be open unless someone is on site watching. Call if you have any questions. Chuck- Donkers Cell: 612-518-6081 E)ff*ee2 612 330 6082 6 of 30 7 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS 14168 Oak Park Boulevard North • Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Phone: 651;439-4439 Fax:651!439-0574 April 29, 2022 Mr, Mark Meyer VSSA Care Center LLC 2845 Hamline Ave N Roseville, MN 55113 Re: Agreement for the Payment of City Services Dear Mr. Meyer: Perthe agreement between the City and VSSA, the VSSA Care Center and VSSA-Boutwell's Landing a payment for city services for 2022 is calculated to be$45,342. (See calculation/information below— generated per Exhibit B of the agreement dated December 5, 2007.) The installments are due May 15, 2022 and October 15, 2022_ The amount due on each installment is $22,671.00. Sincerely, ��cs/tc.r� -' Betty aruso Finance Director Cc: Eric Johnson, City Administrator CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS VSSA Care Center-Agreement for Payment in Lieu of Taxes PI D 9 05.029.20.13.0011 Actual Actu a f Assse5sed Value Jan 2.2021 Assessed Value Ian 7 2n2n ... .. .... . . Favable 2022 Payable 2021 VSSASkilled Carecenter County Valuation of Exempt Portiori $ 6,456,900.00 $ 6,362,200.00 Tota I Tax Capacity $ 128,388.00 $ 126,494.00 Tota 4 Fiscal Disparities Tax Capacity' $40,776 $39,891 Total Tax Capacity-Su6JecttoCity Tax $ 87,612.00 $ 86,603.00 Total City Tax Due: $ 45,342.00 $ 44,027.00 Fiscal Disparities Rate:, 0.31759900 0.31536200 City's Tax Rate: 0.5175288230 0.5083829724 Source:Washington County 7of30 Tues City U.S.A. Senate Counsel,Research,and Fiscal Analysis TomBottem Director Senate Minnesota Senate Building State of Minnesota 95 University Ave.W.Suite 3300 Sr.PAUL,MN 55155-1800 (651)296-4791 www.senate.mn/scrfa S.F. No. 3641 — Electric generation transition aid establishment (as proposed to be amended by A-5 amendment) Author: Senator Karin Housley Prepared by: Bjorn Arneson, Legislative Analyst(651/296-3812) Date: April 26, 2022 Overview S.F. 3641 proposes a transition aid program for local governments for which the tax base is reduced because of the retirement of one or more electric generating units at an electric generating plant owned by a public utility. Summary Subdivision 1. Definitions. Provides definitions of"electric generation property," "electric generating unit," "eligible taxing jurisdiction," "unit base year," and "unit differential". Subdivision 2. Required notification. Requires a public utility to give notice to the commissioner of revenue when the utility expects to retire an electric generating unit and remove that unit from the property tax base. The notice must be filed together with the reports required under current law that the commissioner uses to establish valuations for utility property. Subdivision 3. Unit transition amount.Provides a formula to calculate the aid attributable the retirement of a single electric generating unit. The initial transition amount is a function of the local jurisdiction's tax rate and the reduction in the electric generation property tax base in the first year that the unit is no longer included in the tax base. Provides that the aid attributable to a unit phases out over a period of 20 years. Subdivision 4. Electric generation transition aid. Provides that the transition aid for an eligible taxing jurisdiction equals the sum of the unit transition amounts calculated for the jurisdiction for that year. Subdivision 5.Aid elimination. Requires that transition aid be eliminated for a taxing jurisdiction for which the taxable value is at least 90 percent of the taxable value in the year before the jurisdiction first qualified for transition aid, as adjusted for inflation. Exempts the retroactively eligible units under subdivision 7 from the aid elimination criteria. 8 of 30 Subdivision 6. Commissioner's duties; payment schedule. Requires the commissioner to compute the aid amounts and certify the amounts to each jurisdiction by August 1 in the year preceding the aid payable year. Requires that the aid be paid on the same schedule as local government aid(two installments in July and December). Subdivision 7.Aid for prior unit retirements. Makes certain previous electric generating unit retirements eligible to generate transition aid. Aid is calculated for prior unit retirements first impacting taxable values in assessment years 2017 through 2021. Subdivision 8.Appropriation. Establishes an open statutory general fund appropriation to pay the transition aid. Effective dates. All provisions are effective for aids payable in 2023 and later. 2 9 of 30 COALITION OF What happens to a host TI LITY ITS ES community when a power plant retires? A power plant community's tax base includes: aLaWA 'A Power Plant Residential Businesses Derives most of its value from electric generating machinery, which is centrally assessed by the Dept. of Revenue What happens when a power plant retires? Taxable value of electric generating Electric generating machinery — g g is decommissioned. _ — machinery drops to zero. �� I Electric generating machinery is considered "personal property"of the utility under Minnesota's tax code. Once a plant retires, its personal property is exempt from taxation and the tax capacity attributable to it is removed immediately from the local tax base. Impact on city's tax base Tax burden immediately shifts onto others ... Plant and (es 00;1 Utility Property .®11- Tax base: Tax base: ... resulting in hard choices Plant's final year First year after retirement 10 of 30 for communities. SF3641 /H F3977 COALITION OF TI LITY CITIES will help host communities thrive after plants retire Plant Retirement Timeline Becker Unit 1 Cohasset Unit 3 Red Wing Units 1 and 2* Monticello I I I I W A AM s AL AM AM I I I I Becker Unit 2 Oak Park Heights Becker Unit 3 Cohasset Unit 4 *End of current licenses Unknown retirement:Hoyt Lakes 0� This Bill : Empowers communities to protect residents and Provides property tax replacement aid that faces down businesses from bearing the brunt of property over time—providing valuable time for communities tax shifts that occur when a power plant retires to execute a strategy to develop their future How It Works: • Aid is triggered by the retirement of electric generating unit Year of Percent of Aid Year One Aid • The first year of aid is determined by a calculation to Year 1 ��'. measure the city's lost utility tax capacity Year 2 ' • Aid phases down by 5% each year Year 3 90% Year 4 85% • Allows communities to provide services without drastic cuts or dramatic property tax increases Year 18 15% Year 19 10% Year 20 5% Year 21 0% 11 of 30 Created by Flaherty&Hood,P.A.,4/13/22 BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Katie J. Sieben Chair Valerie Means Commissioner Matthew Schuerger Commissioner Joseph K. Sullivan Commissioner John A. Tuma Commissioner In the Matter of Updating the Generic ISSUE DATE: March 31, 2022 Standards for the Interconnection and Operation of Distributed Generation Facilities DOCKET NO. E-999/CI-16-521 Established under Minn. Stat. § 216B.1611 ORDER MODIFYING PRACTICES AND SETTING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS PROCEDURAL HISTORY On January 24, 2017, the Commission established the Distributed Generation Workgroup (DGWG)to develop the Minnesota interconnection technical standards.' The DGWG is led by the Commission and participants work collaboratively. On July 16, 2021, the Commission requested comments on changes proposed in the DGWG's subgroups' final reports, specifically on issues related to managing interconnection queues. By August 25, 2021, comments were received from the following: • All Energy Solar (AES), • City of Minneapolis, • Dakota Electric Association (Dakota Electric), • Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources (the Department), • Fresh Energy (including a proposal by Fresh Energy, All Energy Solar, and TruNorth Solar), • Institute for Local Self Reliance (ILSR), • Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC), • Minnesota Power, • Minnesota Solar Energy Industries Association (MnSEIA), • Nokomis Energy, • Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy (Xcel Energy), 1 Order Establishing Workgroup and Process to Update ad Improve State Interconnection Standards (Jan.24,2017). This order was concurrently filed in In the Matter of Establishing Generic Standards for Utility Tariffs for Interconnection and Operation of Distributed Generation Facilities under Minnesota Laws 2001, Chapter 212,Docket No. E-999/CI-01-1023 on the same date. 1 12 of 30 • Novel Energy Solutions (NES), and • Otter Tail Power Company (Otter Tail). By October 1, 2021, additional comments were received from the following: • AES, • Dakota Electric, • The Department, • Fresh Energy, • ILSR, • MnSEIA, • Minnesota Power, • Nokomis Energy, • NES, • Otter Tail, • Pivot Energy, • Solar United Neighbors, and • Xcel Energy. On January 20, 2022, the Commission met to consider this matter. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I. Summary In this order, the Commission requires Xcel Energy to modify its treatment of pending and future interconnection requests. II. Introduction The Commission is charged under Minn. Stat. § 216B.1611 with establishing statewide standards for the interconnection and parallel operation of distributed energy resources (DER) of no more than 10 megawatts (MW).2 Towards that end, the Commission established the Minnesota Distributed Energy Resources Interconnection Process (MN DIP), which outlines a procedure and provisions for the interconnection of DER. Much of the work of developing proposals and establishing processes has been informed by extensive work of the DGWG and its subgroups. 2 "Distributed Energy Resources" (DER) is emerging terminology used to capture both traditional "distributed generation"and storage technologies; however,this term is not currently defined in Minnesota statutes or rules, and at times the Commission applies it to a broader category that includes demand-side management(controlling load like air conditioners or water heaters) and,in some cases, energy efficiency and electric vehicles.Under MN DIP,the term is limited to generation and storage and does not apply to technologies that are load-based, such as a load center. 2 13 of 30 III. Xcel Energy's Interconnection Queue Management At any given time, multiple interconnection requests are filed with Xcel Energy. Under MN DIP, these are collected into a single administrative queue.' Xcel Energy processes this queue sequentially and has frequently placed projects, of all sizes, "on-hold" until the interconnection review of the project ahead in queue is complete and either has a signed agreement or has been withdrawn; interconnections of 40 kilowatts (kW) or less may continue moving forward through the process in parallel (parallel review) if doing so would not materially affect projects ahead in queue, and in turn, equipment or system reliability. Xcel Energy also pauses the MN DIP review timeframes for applications with an on-hold designation. The Company has begun hiring additional staff to assist with reducing review times. A. Positions of the Parties 1. Xcel Energy Xcel Energy explained that designating projects as being on-hold was necessary under MN DIP, which requires the sequential processing of interconnection requests. Xcel Energy also noted the parameters of projects ahead in queue provided critical information for subsequent studies, since approved projects affect the available capacity of distribution equipment. This approach minimizes re-studies and conserves time and money of both the DER customers, including developers and homeowners, and Xcel Energy. 2. The Department The Department recommended changes to Xcel Energy's queue management, including support for the Company's implementation of parallel review of projects equal to or less than 40 kW. The Department further recommended applying parallel review of projects larger than 40 kW where there is no known existing capacity constraint on the feeder or substation as a way to "fast-track"projects between 20 kW and 5 MW. Although concerned that the smaller projects 40 kW or less may be assigned expensive interconnection costs, the Department supported the change, which would expedite application review. The Department also recommended that the Commission require Xcel Energy to track the status of applications in parallel review, as well as the status of interconnection applications that are sequentially reviewed, and to subsequently report the data. 3. Other Commenters Fresh Energy opposed placing projects on hold. It noted that the on-hold designation was not part of MN DIP and was an internal process developed by Xcel Energy. Fresh Energy argued that, in practice, Xcel Energy's approach prevented any overlap of the review process. This led to lengthy queues, in some cases anticipated to take longer than 8 years. MNSEIA, Nokomis, Novel Energy, and AES, who shared in Fresh Energy's opposition, cited their own experiences with the interconnection process. ' Under MN DIP 1.8.3,the queue may be subdivided by geographical region(i.e. feeder, substation,etc.). 3 14 of 30 Fresh Energy, MNSEIA, Nokomis, Novel Energy, and AES also recommended that projects greater than 40 kW be processed in parallel if there are no known capacity constraints on the substation or feeder. For other projects, they recommended a semi-parallel process based on when projects met certain milestones in the review process. IREC similarly recommended the Commission remain open to considering parallel studies to reduce review timeframes and improve interconnection queue management. AES and ILSR recommended applying a fast-track process to projects in areas where there are no known capacity constraints. Nokomis, AES, Fresh Energy, MnSEIA, Pivot Energy, and IREC recommended requiring Xcel Energy to end the on-hold process. They were united in their position that updates to that process should be made, and they therefore suggested several different timelines, ranging from immediately to a year, and solutions, varying from modifications to Xcel Energy's administrative treatment to adding more engineering staff. B. Commission Action Based on the comments of all the parties, it is clear the time it takes to interconnect some projects to Xcel Energy's system is too long—in some areas projects are estimated to spend years in queue. This is inconsistent with the legislature's policy goal to promote and ease the interconnection of DER. Several solar developers identified Xcel Energy's use of the on-hold status as a major roadblock to the timely processing of applications. When projects are on hold, and the parallel review process is unavailable, the review process is stopped completely, including the steps applicable to other projects in queue that could potentially be processed concurrently with the application under active review. Although Xcel Energy has legitimate reasons to place projects on hold—the scope of approved projects can affect the capacity available for later ones—the time projects are placed on hold has increased in some cases to years. To address these delays, the Commission will require Xcel Energy to phase out the practice of placing project on hold and instead adopt practices to expedite the review process. For projects in areas where there are no known capacity constraints, simplified and fast-track interconnection projects can be processed in parallel. In these situations, there is less concern about projects exceeding Xcel Energy's equipment's limitations. This would apply to fast-track projects larger than 40 kW in areas with no known capacity constraints, as well as to projects in known capacity-constrained areas where the proposed project does not trigger the capacity constraint. For projects in capacity-constrained areas or that are greater than 40 kW but cannot be processed in parallel, Xcel Energy should continue processing these interconnection applications sequentially. However, Xcel Energy should begin concurrent processing of projects once the one ahead-in-queue has begun a facilities study. This overlap will decrease the time between when an interconnection request is made and approved (which is longer than the time a project spends under review). In making this change, the Commission understands that projects may still spend a significant time in queue—Xcel Energy has led Minnesota's utilities in the number of interconnection requests and successfully interconnected DERsrather, the Commission's goal is to shorten the time to a decision on approval as much as possible. 4 15 of 30 Because this change is significant, the Commission concurs with the Department that it deserves additional monitoring. The Commission will require Xcel Energy to make quarterly compliance reports with specific information, the requirements for which are listed in detail in the ordering paragraphs set forth below. IV. Group Studies Group studies are a method of studying several projects simultaneously, such as in a cluster, rather than individually in a series. Cluster studies involve grouping a series of DER projects together for a system impact study and later a facilities study. In other words, DER projects are considered as a whole for purposes of the analyses and related actions. DER projects that are clustered also share various costs, including system upgrades, if required. Under MN DIP, cluster studies require the utility and interconnection customer to mutually agree to undertake the study. A. Positions of the Parties 1. Xcel Energy Xcel Energy proposed group studies be used in areas with no known capacity constraints as a method to speed up review. It also proposed their use for large projects in areas with capacity constraints to ensure appropriate upgrades are made. Xcel Energy specifically proposed three different types of group studies: 1. Distribution Group Studies. The "Distribution Group Study" is aimed at projects in non-capacity constrained queues that do not currently risk exceeding the DER capacity limits. 2. Transmission and Distribution Studies. Transmission and Distribution Studies are aimed at projects in capacity constrained areas that would exceed the capacity limit and require substantial upgrades like a new feeder or substation transformer are required. 3. Voluntary Cluster Studies. At any point, applicants may voluntarily request a cluster study, at which point they would be placed into one of the two queues. 2. The Department The Department generally supported the idea of a group study pilot program but disagreed with limiting the use to locations without capacity constraints. The use of group studies for capacity constrained projects would potentially benefit an individual project and improve queue management by allowing shared costs of significant system upgrades among project developers. The Department noted that a number of issues needed to be resolved before implementing group studies, including but not limited to the number of participants, whether participation is mandatory or voluntary, the circumstances under which a participant may drop out of the study, and consequences for dropping out of a study. 5 16 of 30 3. Other Commenters Fresh Energy, MNSEIA, Nokomis, Novel Energy, and AES were generally supportive of the use of group studies, viewing this process change as an important tool to address existing problems in capacity constrained locations. Fresh Energy, along with MnSEIA and IREC, was concerned with the lack of technical information about these locations in the record. As a result, Fresh Energy suggested Xcel Energy complete a technical assessment beforehand to ensure that the parties and Commission had accurate information. Other commentors also took issue with the specifics of Xcel Energy's proposal. They noted that the proposal was not codified in MN DIP, leaving Xcel Energy with broad discretion to design and implement the process. The Department, Fresh Energy, MnSEIA, and IREC recommended that the Commission convene a stakeholder workgroup to identify, and where possible, resolve remaining key issues. B. Commission Action The Commission will grant Xcel Energy a variance to MN DIP 1.8.3 to pilot mandatory group studies for areas with three or more applications greater than 40 kW that cannot be reviewed in parallel. The Commission echoes the Department—in these situations, allowing individual projects to share costs will help spread what can be a significant financial hurdle. Under existing practice, the project at the front of the queue may solely bear the burden of financing upgrades that benefit other in-queue DER customers. The Commission will also direct Xcel to create a working group to discuss and finalize the details of the group study process, as set forth in the ordering paragraphs below. Having clear guidance for group studies will benefit all parties. It will not only allow DER customers to advance their projects, but it will also allow Xcel Energy a clear and organized process moving forward. Given the number of interconnection applications filed with Xcel Energy, reasonable efforts should be made to streamline the process. Finally, the Commission agrees with Fresh Energy that a more complete technical assessment will be an asset to the Commission and parties. As a result, Xcel Energy must file information on participating applications, relevant feeder and substation characteristics, the time in which each phase of the study was completed, any group retention measures (deposits or penalties), the general cost allocation process used, and any disputes that arose. The continuing use of group studies is not set in stone; rather, the Commission aims to obtain useful data from this effort for making informed decisions moving forward. V. DER Planning Limits Xcel Energy currently allows DER interconnections up to a technical planning limit that is the sum of the equipment rating and the daytime minimum load(DML), the demand for electricity during the daytime. 6 17 of 30 A. Positions of the Parties 1. Xcel Energy After extensive input from stakeholders, Xcel Energy proposed setting the DER technical planning limit at 80% of the equipment's rating plus DML. Although the exact DML is variable, Xcel Energy proposed this limit to ensure the safe and reliable parallel operation of DER. Further, Xcel Energy asserted it had authority to implement this change because it was an engineering decision solely within its purview. In response to opposition from stakeholders on this issue, Xcel stayed implementation pending Commission consideration. Xcel Energy further proposed to lower the available capacity for all DER projects by reserving 25% of the technical planning limit for DER systems less than 40 kW. This small DER capacity reservation would require an amendment to MN DIP. 2. Other Commenters Several commentors, including Fresh Energy and IREC, opposed Xcel Energy's changes to the technical planning limit. They noted the change would significantly reduce the total DER capacity, that Xcel Energy had not demonstrated the technical justifications for it, and that the change requires Commission approval. Many of the same commenters also spoke against Xcel Energy's small DER capacity reservation. They noted the cap was arbitrary and addressed a narrow problem. Several noted that such a reservation was discriminatory—it favored customers with on-site distributed energy over customers seeking community solar garden subscriptions. B. Commission Action At this time, the Commission believes that the DML issue deserves further study and will require Xcel Energy to raise specific issues with DML in its quarterly compliance filings. While the commenters opposing Xcel Energy's change to the technical planning limit have valid concerns, the limitation may have a foundation in sound engineering practice. The Commission, however, cannot make that determination at this time based on the limited information in the record. Instead of making a change now, the Commission will require Xcel Energy to provide information which will help all parties in the future. The Commission will also reject Xcel Energy's proposed 25%reservation for DER systems smaller than 40 kW and corresponding edit to the MN DIP. The change is not well supported by the record and favors homeowner-owned systems over community solar gardens. However, neither the Commission's statutes or rules include such a preference. Like several commenters, the Commission is concerned that such a change could become problematic in practice, if not necessarily in intent. VI. Upgrade Costs for Smaller Projects To facilitate continued DER development and growth, equitable access for all sizes of DER, and timeline efficiencies, a DGWG subgroup had identified cost-sharing proposals, and Xcel Energy also proposed funding system upgrade costs for some small residential projects. 7 18 of 30 A. Positions of the Parties 1. Xcel Energy Xcel Energy proposed to pay for distribution system upgrades up to $15,000 per new, residential Solar*Rewards interconnection application for distribution upgrades using Solar*Rewards funds, capped annually at $250,000. Xcel Energy offered to fund"shared" system components such as transformers.' 2. The Department The Department objected to recovering upgrade costs associated with individual rooftop solar installations using Solar*Rewards funds, which are drawn from all customers. While solar generation has benefits for all customers, the Department noted the economic benefit of homeowner-owned solar flowed to one household. This imbalance harmed many households, such as renters, since the cost was spread to many, including those currently struggling to pay their utility bills. 3. Other Commenters MnSEIA supported Xcel Energy's proposal because it would encourage residential and small business customers to install DER. MnSEIA proposed expanding the benefit further to system- wide upgrades for all small projects. Fresh Energy cautiously supported Xcel Energy's proposal. Fresh Energy believed the program needed defined boundaries and was concerned about how Xcel Energy tied the benefit to the Solar*Rewards program. Several solar developers echoed these concerns. Fresh Energy, IREC, and TruNorth Solar proposed an alternative cost-sharing proposal applicable to small DER upgrades that would be funded by a one-time fee charged to every DER application for 40 kW and under. Their proposal also included eligibility requirements, a system for calculating upgrade charges, and program operations. B. Commission Action The Commission supports the cost-sharing proposal. This option reduces risk to customers who have considered a small on-site DER solution that triggers a distribution upgrade, while also protecting ratepayers from costs associated with benefits to individual customers. The legislature has encouraged DER, with cost savings and reliability benefits to customers, and the proposal furthers this important public policy objective. Fresh Energy, IREC, and TruNorth Solar have identified a clear outline for the process, and Xcel Energy's implementation plan should follow these guidelines. Because the alternative proposal does not have a cap, the Commission will approve Xcel Energy's proposed cap of$15,000 per individual customer upgrade. Depending on the success of the program, this amount may be ' Xcel Energy noted that some upgrades such as individual residential service lines,metering,etc.will still be fully paid for by the requestor, similar to what occurs at the time of the filing. 8 19 of 30 modified in the future. Similarly, the source of the funds may be subsequently evaluated once the Commission and the parties have real-world information. VII. Dispute Resolution Process The MN DIP dispute process applies to all interconnection customers with less than or equal to 10 MW operating in parallel with the utility grid. The process is broadly applicable to all DER interconnections, including homeowners and developers. A. Positions of the Parties 1. Xcel Energy Xcel Energy proposed that mediation be required prior to engaging the Commission following the existing provisions in MN DIP 5.3.1 through 5.3.7. This would be incorporated into a two- track process: 1. Expedited Process. A 10-business day process for non-technical issues (e.g. application portal functions). 2. Regular MN DIP Process. A 43-business day process, with options for mutual extension, for technical and more complex interconnection issues. Xcel Energy believed that many complaints were part of the system learning process and would decrease over time as more parties became familiar with the interconnection application process. 1. Other Commenters AES, NES, and MnSEIA opposed the expedited process. They stated that it would not resolve the underlying issues for complaints and would add extra work and create additional delays. Fresh Energy supported the expedited process for non-technical issues. However, Fresh Energy recommended clarifying that the expedited process would not preclude parties from submitting a complaint to the Commission's Consumer Affairs Office. As an alternative to Xcel Energy's plan, NES suggested that the independent engineer process be reinstated. The independent engineer would issue a nonbinding decision that could be challenged before the Commission. 2. The Department The Department supported the proposal to address non-technical issues under the expedited process. The Department noted that any complaint had the ability to slow down the interconnection queue because projects were stayed pending a resolution. The Department also opposed the suggestion by some other commentors to reinstitute the independent engineer to resolve technical disputes. The Department noted that in the past it was difficult to maintain a list of independent engineers because many worked for either DER developers or the utilities. 9 20 of 30 B. Commission Action The Commission appreciates the effort of the parties to find a better process for resolving issues between customers, installers, developers and utilities. Because parties have submitted a variety of solutions with little consensus, the Commission will therefore ask the Distributed Generation Workgroup to develop a proposal for both independent technical review and a queue or policy review process with the goal of reducing complaints or appeals to the Commission. In addition, by involving the Distributed Generation Workgroup, more stakeholders will have an ability to participate. VIII. Further Reporting Requirements; Stay If Xcel Energy seeks to recover the cost for distribution upgrades, the Commission will require Xcel Energy to make additional reports of the costs incurred and the technical rationale for each upgrade, as set forth in the ordering paragraphs below. The Commission will further require Xcel Energy to report on processes developed through the Group Study that the Company ultimately implements with detailed information, also as set forth in the ordering paragraphs below. The Commission will also stay Xcel Energy's implementation of the Affected System Study Agreement with the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) and will seek additional input. This stay only applies to implementation of this agreement itself, it does not apply to any other requirements of this order, including deadlines for phasing out the on-hold practice. Given that these projects have already spent significant time in the interconnection queue, the Commission does not intend to further increase that time. Further, the stay does not impact the current MN DIP-approved Affected System Study process used by utilities and MISO. ORDER 1. Xcel Energy must phase out, for feeders and substations that are not clearly documented as capacity constrained, the "on-hold" practice of staying project timeframes to perform serial review of interconnection applications over the course of a year with quarterly compliance reporting. 2. Within 30 days, Xcel Energy must expand its parallel processing to all fast-track projects, applied only to areas where there are no known capacity constraints. 3. Within 30 days, Xcel Energy must move the trigger to begin reviewing the next-in-queue project when the ahead-in-queue project has begun the facilities study. This is applicable to: a. Projects greater than 40 kilowatts (kW) in areas with no known capacity constraints and b. In-known capacity constraint areas where the project itself would not trigger the applicable known capacity constraint. 10 21 of 30 4. Xcel Energy must increase tracking and reporting of the following related to the parallel and serial processing of applicants in quarterly Minnesota.Distributed Energy Resources Interconnection Process (MN DIP) reports: a. Number of projects 40 kW or smaller and the number that are larger than 40 kW that failed initial review screens, supplemental screens, and required upgrades: i. Per quarter in the year before parallel screening was implemented and ii. Per quarter after parallel screening was implemented; b. Identify/tag applications screened in parallel; C. Additional analysis on the potential impact to interconnection costs of switching to parallel and earlier trigger for serial processing; d. Number and cost of restudies associated with moving serial review for next in queue; and e. Impact on interconnection review timeframes. 5. The Commission grants Xcel Energy a variance to MN DIP 1.8.3 to pilot mandatory group studies for areas with three or more applications greater than 40 kW that cannot be reviewed in parallel. 6. Xcel is required to create and convene a working group, with assistance from Commission staff, to discuss key topics, as follows: a. The Working Group will be conducted over a period of 120 days. b. The Working Group will discuss and file a report with an issues matrix detailing all resolved and unresolved issues, a description of parry positions and recommended decision options along with any references to record documentation on topics identified by updated guidelines and in-progress findings from Xcel Energy's mandatory group study project. 7. Xcel Energy must provide the following reporting on any pilot Group Study processes it implements: a. A compliance filing six months after the date of this order describing the participating applications, relevant feeder and substation characteristics, the time in which each phase of the study was completed, any group retention measures (deposits or penalties), the general cost allocation process used, and any disputes that arose; and b. A presentation at the next Solar*Rewards Community stakeholder meeting that follows submission of this report, to be given by Xcel Energy with input from participating applicants about the process and lessons learned. 8. In its quarterly compliance filings in this docket, Xcel Energy must discuss any specific issues that arise as a result of reduced daytime minimum load on feeders with high 11 22 of 30 distributed energy resources (DER) capacity, or specific issues related to DER and operational flexibility. 9. The Commission denies Xcel Energy's request to edit MN DIP 1.9.1. 10. The Commission approves the cost-sharing proposal for Xcel Energy customers with less than 40 kW DER created by Fresh Energy, IREC, and TruNorth with a plan by Xcel Energy to implement by the end of August 31, 2022, within 60 days of this Order, capping individual upgrades at$15,000. 11. The Commission requests the Distributed Generation Workgroup propose an independent, unbiased technical review process and a queue or policy review process with the goal of reducing appeals to the Commission. 12. Xcel Energy must provide a detailed report of the costs incurred and technical rationale for each upgrade should Xcel Energy seek cost recovery for distribution upgrades. 13. Xcel Energy must stay implementation of the Affected System Study Agreement until a comment period regarding the following issues has concluded: a. Whether the Agreement between Xcel Energy and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator requires changes to MN DIP or to a tariff, b. What those changes might be; C. Whether any changes to the Agreement should be requested; d. Whether any jurisdictional issues exist; and e. Any other related issues. 14. The Commission requests the Executive Secretary to issue notice of a comment period that addresses key issues. 15. This order shall become effective immediately. BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION �:piLebUh���, Will Seuffert S Executive Secretary This document can be made available in alternative formats (e.g., large print or audio) by calling 651.296.0406 (voice). Persons with hearing or speech impairment may call using their preferred Telecommunications Relay Service or email consumer.puc2state.mn.us for assistance. 12 23 of 30 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Chrishna Beard, hereby certify that I have this day, served a true and correct copy of the following document to all persons at the addresses indicated below or on the attached list by electronic filing, electronic mail, courier, interoffice mail or by depositing the same enveloped with postage paid in the United States mail at St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission ORDER MODIFYING PRACTICES AND SETTING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Docket Number E-999/0-16-521 Dated this 31st day of March, 2022 /s/ Chrishna Beard 24 of 30 Eric Johnson From: Mary Mccomber <marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Monday,April 25, 2022 3:27 PM To: Eric Johnson Subject: Fwd: Minnesota Twins Home Run Lunch For weekly notes? -----Original Message----- From: MPLS Regional Chamber<info@mplschamber.com> To: marymccomber@aol.com Sent: Mon, Apr 25, 2022 3:01 pm Subject: Minnesota Twins Home Run Lunch t A � �iCK �T T1�RGET FIELD ' FORLUNCHL+IITH THE ' - o NHNNF:SOTA 11'�I'�Il'ri5 til � _....---....... .,� l AOCCO BALDELLI BYRON BUXTON CARLOS CORREA I I MANAGER CENTERFIELDER SHORTSTOP It's time for the Minnesota Twins Home Run Lunch Back at Target Field!Join us at the ballpark for lunch and hear from Twins players about the 2022 season. .= Premier iS Abbott ' ..... Sponsor: ........................................ 4 Contributing { FWM HIWSG' J r'r E55E RLl KRpMFFi Sponsors: Martens 'I'4 XoelEnergy .............................................................. Media •C Event TARGET FIELD Sponsor. TwinCitues partners. PIONEER PRESS 1 25 of 30 Eric Johnson From: Mary Mccomber <marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Saturday,April 23, 2022 7:37 AM To: Eric Johnson Subject: Fwd: The Next American Migration: What Cities Should Know About Climate Change and Populations on the Move For weekly notes -----Original Message----- From: National League Of Cities (NLC) <news@nlc.org> To: marymccomber@aol.com Sent: Sat, Apr 23, 2022 6:03 am Subject: The Next American Migration: What Cities Should Know About Climate Change and Populations on the Move News,resources and events for local leaders and staff. NATIONAL LEAGUE NLCOF .✓ V, Y _ . a The Next American Migration : What Cities Should Know About Climate Change and Populations on the Move As climate change worsens, more Americans are being forced to relocate in response to extreme weather events. NLC's new report explores what climate migration means for the future of cities and what local leaders can do to proactively plan for these changes. 1 26 of 30 F ax Get Ready to Apply for Road Top 5 Ways Cities Are How to Tell if Green Bonds Safety Grants Addressing Climate Change Make Sense for Your City View All Articles Industry News What We're Reading: • As extreme weather increases, cities brace for climate-related migration -American City& County(April 22, 2022) • Climate migration: it's coming and cities need to prepare - Bond Buyer(April 21, 20222) • Clarence Anthony Discusses NLC's Latest Climate Report on MSNBC - MSNBC (April 21, 2022) • Americans are fleeing climate change — here's where they can go - CNBC (April 21, 2022) • Harassment and intimidation are driving local leaders away from public service, and we all stand to lose - Smart Cities Dive (April 19, 2022) • Report: Governments stand to benefit from 'metaverse' and its associated technologies -American City& County(April 18, 2022) 2 27 of 30 Capstone Challenge Series Bringing Members and Partners Togetherl n Createinnovative for your municipality. Opportunity Available to all NILC Members Apply by May 6 Announcements ARPA Reporting Deadline for Small Communities is April 30 The April 30 reporting deadline for Local Fiscal Recovery Funds is approaching for Non- Entitlement Units of Local Government, (generally municipalities with less than 50,000 residents) to file their annual reports. Learn More > Climate, Health & Equity: Practical Actions for Cities Join us on April 26 at 2:30 pm ET for an overview of the City Health Dashboard —a data and mapping tool used to highlight disparities in cities and neighborhoods. Register Here > Five Ways Mayors are Advancing Education in Their Communities During a recent Mayors' Education Task Force meeting, the group zeroed in on strategies that support students and improve education and workforce outcomes across communities. Learn more about five innovative solutions cities are pursuing. Learn More > How to Leverage Community Data for COVID-19 Response Join NLC and mySidewalk for an informative webinar on April 28 at 2:00 PM ET that will explore how two health agencies leveraged community data to respond to COVID-19. Register Here > 3 28 of 30 How Resident Feedback Can Help You Build Community Resilience Join us on April 29 at 2:00 PM to learn how your city can harness community input and implement policies that support recovery and long-term success. Register Here > N Tools for Cities to Bring Nature's Benefits to Young Children Celebrate Earth Day by learning tangible ways to achieve multiple city goals aligned with nature access, particularly for young children, ages 0 - 5. Gain access to resources available to any city interested in making sure young children grow up with nature's benefits in their daily life. Learn More View more Sustainability& Resilience Resources here. Job Openings See who's hiring right now: • Division Manager(Collaborative Agreement Sustainability Manager) - City of Cincinnati, OH • City Planner- City of Stephenville, TX • City Development Administrator- City of St. Petersburg View All • • Openings 4 29 of 30 Join the team at NLC: • Program Director- Health and Wellness • Senior Specialist- Grants Management • Program Specialist, Senior- Center for City Solutions, Infrastructure View All NLC Openings Helpful NLC Links: Articles Upcoming Events Resources & Training Advocacy If this message is not displaying properly, please view in browser. NLCNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CITIES STRONG TOGETHER You may opt-out of email communications from NLC at any time. Update your communication preferences. This message was intended for: marymccomber@aol.com 660 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 450, Washington, DC 20001 Privacy Policy I @ 2021 NLC,All Rights Reserved Powered by Higher Logic 5 30 of 30