Catching up from a couple days ago, the “PowerOn Midwest” Applicants, Northern States Power Company, Great River Energy, and ITC Midwest, have filed “Applicants’ Response to Scoping Comments.”

This is important, because “Response to Scoping Comments” in another docket was the vehicle introducing the notion of a “DNR Proxy” route, one that did NOT include the DNR’s opposition to a new Mississippi River Crossing, and did not include recommendation of EXISTING CROSSINGS, alternate river crossings that were utterly reasonable. Veracity matters!

This Filing Letter and COS Scoping Comments needs a very close look!

For example, look at their bottom line on the Thomforde suggestions:

“THE APPLICANTS… DO NOT CONSENT TO FURTHER EVALUATION!”

Wonder why?

Yesterday, my Petition for Rulemaking was up before the Commission, last on the agenda, starting at 3:00:12 and going to the end… just a few short minutes.

• Rulemaking Petition – Minn. R. ch. 7850 & 7849 April 13th, 2026
• Comment on 7849 and 7850 Rulemaking Petition April 16th, 2026
• 7850 Rulemaking – Reply Comments May 7th, 2026
• Rulemaking at PUC tomorrow May 27th, 2026

No surprise really, same result as with the years long Minn. R. 7849 and 7850 docket R-12-1246, same result as the wind Minn. R. 7854 rulemaking petition (20+ years they’ve been siting wind using the SMALL wind GUIDELINES)… sigh…

Recent release, from Strategic Economic Research:

Economic Impact Analysis of the PowerOn Midwest Project in Minnesota

And downloaded for future reference just in case it disappears. The “Implan” economic analysis for Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project was such a farce — we’ll see if this is the same:

Are costs of the project considered as well? There are all sorts of costs and benefits that can be quantified. Was it a reasonable range or limited to those easily claimed and dollars assigned?

In attempts to prove up benefits, Implan has been used before. From testimony regarding Duluth Labovitz School’s Implan study of economic benefits of the Mesaba Project coal gasification plant, in the hearing, specifically the economic health benefits of coal:

Is this report as bizarre?

Let’s get reading. Get familiar enough with this to pick it apart.

I expect that a similar report will be issued for the eastern portion of the 765kV project (CN-25-121). The project applicants are certainly vulnerable when “what’s in it for Minnesota” and “what’s in it for our community” questions arise about this “pass-through” project.

p.s. The report does list tax payments to “counties” but I want to see this itemized, county by county:

Read this all-inclusive Get Out of Jail Free card:

What a stunning admission of guilt!

White House: 202-456-1111 (good luck with that)

www.whitehouse.gov/contact

Call your Congresscritter:

www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member