NEBRASKA POWER REVIEW BOARD
Minutes of the 874th Meeting
May 15, 2026
The 874th meeting of the Nebraska Power Review Board (Board or PRB) was held in the First Floor Hearing Room, Nebraska State Office Building, 301 Centennial Mall South, Lincoln, Nebraska. The meeting was called to order at 9:02 a.m. The roll was called and present were Chairman Hutchison, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk, and Mr. Austin. Mr. Grennan was also attendance via Web-ex, so the meeting will count as a virtual conference meeting. Mr. Liegl had previously informed the Board that he would be unable to attend this meeting due to a traveling conflict. The executive director stated that public notice for the meeting had been published in the Lincoln Journal Star newspaper on May 5, 2026. The meeting was available to the public through Webex. The Webex login information was available on the Board’s website and in the published notice. The agenda on the Board’s website provided links to the agenda items with associated documents the Board will consider, as well as a link to the Nebraska Open Meetings Act. Executive Director Texel explained that if any member of the public watching the meeting on Webex wanted to speak, they can click on the “raise your hand” icon. They would need to type their name, address and organization (if any) into the “chat.” Anyone wishing to comment on an item or ask a question could also type the comment or question in the chat function and the Board’s staff would read the question or comment to the Board. All background materials for the agenda items to be acted on were provided to all Board members prior to the meeting and a copy of the materials was in each Board member’s meeting notebook. The executive director announced that a copy of the Nebraska Open Meetings Act was on display on the south wall of the room, and another copy was available in a black three-ring binder on the table at the back of the room. A copy of all materials that the Board would consider was available for public inspection, as well as extra copies of the agenda.
The Board first considered the draft minutes from its April 17, 2026, public meeting. The minutes had been sent electronically to the Board members. The staff was not aware of any corrections needed, and no one contacted the Board regarding any changes. Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk moved to approve the minutes. Mr. Austin seconded the motion. Voting on the motion: Chairman Hutchison – yes, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk – yes, Mr. Austin – yes, Mr. Grennan – yes, and Mr. Liegl – absent. The motion carried 4-0 with one absent.
The next item was acceptance of the expense report for the month of April. In March there was $45,640.72 in personal services, $19,489.97 in operating expenses, and $2,812.64 in travel expenses. The total April expenses were 67,943.33. April is the tenth month of the fiscal year, so 83.33% of the year has passed. The cashflow worksheet shows the PRB has used 95.2% of its cash fund. At the end of April, the agency was approximately 11.87% over budget. Last month the board was approximately 8.9% over budget. Mr. Austin moved to accept the April expense report. Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk seconded the motion. Voting on the motion: Chairman Hutchison – yes, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk – yes, Mr. Austin – yes, Mr. Grennan – yes, and Mr. Liegl – absent. The motion carried 4-0 with one absent.
The next agenda item was to consider PRB-4074. This is an application submitted by the City of Auburn Board of Public Works. The application was filed on May 1, 2026. The application requests permission to build .92 mile of 7.2/12.47 kV 3-phase distribution line in Nemaha County. The new line will provide service to a new water well for the Nemaha County Rural Water District #1. The location of the well and therefore the project is in the Omaha Public Power District’s service area. OPPD submitted a signed Consent and Waiver Form agreeing to the construction and waiving a hearing. As required by Neb. Rev. Stat. section 37-807(3), the PRB consulted with the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission. In a letter dated April 17, 2026, the Commission informed the Board that the project is within the range of the endangered Northern Long-Eared Bat. The project will use underground directional boring to avoid removal of trees that provide habitat and roosting for the bats. Due to the type of construction, the Commission determined the project would have “No Effect” on endangered or threatened species. Nemaha County is not on the list of geographic areas where any “military installation” as defined by 70-1001(9) is located. Due to this, Auburn BPW does not need to certify that its vendors do not use foreign adversary components. The application appears to be straightforward and the executive director recommended approval. Mr. Austin moved to approve PRB-4704. Mr. Grennan seconded the motion. Voting on the motion: Chairman Hutchison – yes, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk – yes, Mr. Austin – yes, Mr. Grennan – yes, and Mr. Liegl – absent. The motion carried 4-0 with one absent.
The next agenda item was to consider additional information for the 2026 Load and Capability Report. The Board has been discussing including additional information in the 2026 Load and Capability Report that addresses the challenges associated with providing service to new large loads in the time frame desired by those loads. The Nebraska Power Association (NPA) expressed concerns, such as the scope of the request. Chairman Hutchison and Mr. Grennan met with the CEOs of NPPD, OPPD and LES on April 7. It was agreed that the NPA Joint Planning Subcommittee would prepare a draft proposal to address the additional information in a new section of the report. The NPA Board would need to approve the draft of the new section, followed by the PRB reviewing the proposal for the new section at the PRB’s June 26 meeting. Then NPA Joint Planning Subcommittee would include the new section in the report when the NPA presents the report to the PRB for final acceptance at the PRB’s August 21 meeting. The Board tabled action on this issue until its June 26 meeting.
The next item was to consider the assessment figure the Board would use for fiscal year 2026-2027. The executive director gave an update concerning the proposed assessment figure. The PRB’s Business Manager, Rebecca Hallgren, calculated that an assessment of 15.77 cents per $1,000 gross revenue is needed. That figure would allow for collection of about $790,500. This amount would provide for the Board’s projected fiscal year 2026-2027 expenses of $710,100, and would replenish the Board’s cash reserve funds by $80,000. The PRB’s average monthly expenses are approximately $55,000. The $80,000 would therefore equal about one and a half month’s expenses to use when the new fiscal year starts, but the new assessment payments from the utilities have not yet been received. The Governor’s Budget Office determined the PRB should use an assessment figure of 13.48458. This would mean the PRB would collect $674,200 for the expenses in fiscal year 2026-2027. The anticipated expenses incurred for the current fiscal year (2025-2026) are expected to be $678,000. The amount to be collected for the upcoming fiscal year would be $4,000 less than what the staff anticipates the Board will spend by the end of the current fiscal year. The staff does not believe the number takes into account the known expenses that will be increasing next year. The agency’s matching portion of health care premiums will increase by about $25,200 next year, and the employee raises at the rate the State has agreed with the bargaining unit would be another $6,900 next year. Those two increases alone will cause an increase in expenses of over $32,000, yet the Budget Office is recommending to cut the Board’s cash collection by $4,000. At the end of June (the end of the fiscal year), Ms. Hallgren predicts that the PRB account will have less than $35,000 remaining in it. Due to this, the PRB will likely run out of funds on which to operate before July 31. The PRB may not even have enough to be able to fund its staff payroll on July 16. The assessment letters will be sent to the utilities on or about July 1, but the utilities have 45 days in which to pay. If the assessment figure of 13.48 is used, the agency will likely run out of funds next year in mid-June and face an even worse financial situation. Mr. Liegl, Ms. Hallgren and Executive Director Texel met with the Budget Office director and the budget analyst to express these concerns. The executive director told the Board he and Ms. Hallgren would continue to work with the Budget Office to see if changes to the proposed assessment figure might be made. The Board members agreed to table the approval of the assessment figure until next month.
The next item on the agenda was to consider an amendment to Guidance Document 11. Guidance Document 11 is titled “Acceptance of Filings During Non-Business Hours.” After a recent hearing, it came to the executive director’s attention that the Board does not have a formal rule covering what happens if a deadline for a filing falls on a holiday or weekend. The PRB has historically followed the general rule that the deadline becomes the next business day following the holiday or weekend, but that is not stated in the Board’s Rules of Practice or any guidance document. Guidance Document 11 addresses situations when a filing is made outside normal business hours. The proposed amendment states that if a filing or submission deadline falls on a holiday, weekend, or if the PRB’s offices are closed due to a unscheduled circumstance, the deadline is extended to the end of the next business day on which the PRB offices are open. Some examples of closure due to unscheduled circumstances may include flooding, tornado, fire, or an electrical outage. The executive director stated he largely mirrored the language in Neb. Rev. Stat. section 25-2221. The statute applies expressly to Nebraska courts, but his research showed that the rule is applied more generally, including to administrative agencies. In Strode v. Saunders County Bd. Of Equalization, 283 Neb. 802 (2012) the Nebraska Supreme Court held that “The application of [section] 25-2221 is not limited to proceedings in a court, and [section] 25-2221 applies to matters of practice which are not necessarily enunciated in statute. We therefore conclude that in the absence of a specific imperative to the contrary, [section] 25-2221 applies to administrative rules and regulations, such as the TERC’s rule regarding the time to file a motion for rehearing.” Mr. Austin moved to approve the draft amendment to Guidance Document 11. Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk seconded the motion. Voting on the motion: Chairman Hutchison – yes, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk – yes, Mr. Austin – yes, Mr. Grennan – yes, and Mr. Liegl – absent. The motion carried 4-0 with one absent.
The Board took a ten-minute recess at 9:35 a.m. The Board reconvened its public meeting at 9:45 a.m.
The next item on the agenda was to consider PRB-4078-G. This is an application by the Village of Stuart (Stuart) to install a diesel generator with 1,880 kilowatts (kW) capacity. The application was filed on April 1, 2026. Stuart currently has four generating units with a total capacity of 3,009 kW. Stuart retired two units with an aggregate capacity of 550 kW. The Village converted is electrical system to increase efficiencies. With the voltage upgrade it required the output of the generation facility to be reconfigured or replaced. The two units that were retired could not be reconfigured. The remaining two units could be reconfigured. The Village purchased the 1,880 kW unit from another village that was no longer participating in generation. Along with its application Stuart submitted Exhibit A, which is titled “Subtransmission Impact Study For the 3,394 kW Stuart Diesel Generation Project.” The study goes through what the Village needed to do to install the new generation. Also submitted with the application were signed Consent and Waiver forms from MEAN, NPPD and the Niobrara Valley Electric Membership Corporation agreeing that the proposed construction will serve the public convenience and necessity and the applicant can most economically and feasibly supply the electric service resulting from the proposed construction without unnecessary duplication of facilities. The Board sent out a Notice of Filing and Hearing date to MEAN, NPPD, Niobrara Valley EMC and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) does not submit Consent and Waiver forms to the Board because filing a state form could be viewed as making an appearance, and as a federal agency WAPA does not want to make an appearance in a state administrative hearing. But WAPA did receive notice and did not notify the Board that it objected to the project. The Board also published a public notice in the Atkinson Graphic and the Holt County Independent newspapers on April 16, 2026. The Board did not receive any filing from any member of the public. The Board consulted with the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. section 37-807(3). The Commission determined that the project was within the range of the state and federally listed endangered northern long-eared bat and whooping crane. It is also in the range of the state and federally listed threatened American Burying Beetle and Western Prairie Fringed Orchid, in addition to the state-listed endangered Small White Lady’s Slipper. Considering that the location of the project is within the Village of Stuart, the Commission found the proposed project area does not appear to include suitable habitat for the stated species. Based on this information the Commission determined the project would have “No Effect” on state-listed endangered or threatened species and did not object to the approval of the application. Although a Notice of Hearing was issued for this application, during the recess the Board was provided information that Stuart did not have legal representation present today that could represent the Village to proceed with a hearing. Stuart tried to see if the Village attorney could appear via Webex, but the attorney was not available. The Board discussed with the executive director whether the hearing is required and what provisions of law applied. The Board members first asked if a hearing could be held. The executive director said that an employee can represent the Village in an administrative hearing, but there are certain rules that must be followed. Otherwise the appearance could constitute the unauthorized practice of law. The Nebraska Supreme Court issued rules which set out requirements for an employee of an organization to represent the entity. The Board adopted these rules in PRB Guidance Document 7. For an employee to represent the entity, the entity’s governing body must authorize the nonlawyer to represent the entity in the hearing, and the entity must provide written documentation demonstrating the decision. In this case the Village Board has not authorized the representation.
The Board members then asked if a hearing could be waived. The executive director said state law allows the Board to waive a hearing if it makes certain findings. Neb. Rev. Stat. section 70-1013, states that “…The board may grant the application without notice or hearing, upon the filing of such waivers as it may require, if in its judgment the finding required by section 70-1014 or 70-1014.01 can be made without a hearing.” The executive director pointed out that all parties the Board deemed interested in the application had received notice, and all of the Nebraska utilities had submitted waivers. Since WAPA will not submit a formal waiver in state proceedings+, in his opinion WAPA is not a waiver that is required. Mr. Grennan stated that he thought the application was well put-together and included the study that covered many different aspects of why the generation was necessary. Mr. Austin asked what the criteria was in order to waive the hearing. Executive Director Texel replied that the Board must find that the required waivers have been received, and that the findings set out in 70-1014 can be made without the need for a hearing. The findings are that the application will serve the public convenience and necessity, and that the applicant can most economically and feasibly supply the electric service resulting from the proposed construction without unnecessary duplication of facilities or operations. The Board members agreed that all the waivers required by the Board were submitted and that the application included material that explained the details of why the generation is needed. Chad Doyle, electrical line foreman for Stuart, was at the meeting and offered to answer any questions. Mr. Doyle explained that the generation unit was purchased from the Village of Plainview, which is no longer going to generate power. The unit operates on diesel only and was installed in the Village’s existing generation facility. He explained that the town updated its distribution system and this made it necessary to retire two units that could not be used with the new system. The Village then needed to add some generation and this situation came up where Plainview had this unit and so Stuart purchased the unit. The Board asked if action on the application were tabled if it would have any significant cost to the Village for the delay. Mr. Doyle stated that there would be no financial cost for the delay. Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk made a motion to waive the hearing and approve PRB-4078-G. Mr. Grennan seconded the motion. Voting on the motion: Chairman Hutchison – yes, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk – yes, Mr. Austin – yes, Mr. Grennan – yes, and Mr. Liegl – absent. The motion carried 4-0 with one absent.
The next item on the agenda was the director’s report. The first item was an update on Southwest Power Pool activities. Chairman Hutchison stated that he conducted the first meeting where there was voting items for the states in the Western interconnection and he thought it went well. He spoke about the planning reserve margin (PRM) that is set for the West at 16% for summer and 30% for winter. Collin Sniff, Manager for Energy Regulatory Policy for OPPD, asked about the difference in the PRM for the east and west interconnections. Chairman Hutchison had the staff show a pie chart on SPP’s website on the video screens in the room. He explained that the western states rely on a significant amount of renewables. It did not take long for Resource Adversary warnings to be issued for the west once those states became SPP members.
Executive Director Texel then updated the Board on the PRB’s participation in the Liphardt v. City of Lincoln d/b/a Lincoln Electric System lawsuit in Lancaster County District Court. Mr. Liphardt’s counsel, David Begley, did agree that the enactment of LB 1010 makes the lawsuit moot. Mr. Begley said he would file a voluntary dismissal of the case, but nothing has been filed yet. The executive director expected the dismissal would be filed within the next week or two.
The executive director gave an update on staff activities, which is something Chairman Hutchison has requested. He told the Board that the State of Nebraska has decided to end its use of Webex. The Office of the Chief Information Officer informed the PRB that it will need to switch to Microsoft Teams. The deadline for the changeover is November. Both Sara and Rebecca have attended a learning session on how to use Microsoft Teams. OCIO has not told us when the switch will officially happen for the PRB.
In March the Board received two applications for distribution line extensions that are less than ½ mile in length. No such applications were received in April. The Board has not received any privately developed renewable energy generation facility applications since July 2024. In June and July 2024 the Board received 24 applications, just prior to the Legislative change requiring public meetings and the minutes of the meetings to be filed with the notice. The last notice of a generation facility approved through the federal PURPA self-certification process was in December 2025.
The executive director told the Board the staff is compiling the information for the PRB’s Biennial Report. In even years the Biennial Report is prepared for submission to the Governor and the Legislature. Sara is compiling the necessary information and preparing a draft report for the report that will cover the period from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2026.
Last year the law requiring the public power districts to file their annual budget and audit reports with the PRB was repealed. Sara handles those submittals. We are still receiving some of them, so when they are submitted she lets those districts know that the financials are no longer required to be filed with the PRB.
The executive director stated that the Board’s website had 741 active users during April. There were 462 unique users from the U.S., but interestingly, there were 252 users from Singapore, 8 from China, and 5 from the Netherlands. He also told the Board that the digital service area map on the Board’s website changed how the search drop down appears. The PRB’s contractor, gWorks made the change. Now to enter the utility name you have to click on the “search” button on the top of the page and then the box will drop down to input the name of the desired utility. He believes this is less user friendly, so the staff will see if it can be set up as it was previously.
Executive Director Texel noted that the next meetings are June 26, July 17, and August 21, 2026. Mr. Austin and Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk stated that they would not be able to attend the July meeting.
Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Grennan seconded the motion. Voting on the motion: Chairman Hutchison – yes, Vice Chairwoman Gottschalk – yes, Mr. Austin – yes, Mr. Grennan – yes, and Mr. Liegl – absent. The motion carried 4 – 0 with one absent. The meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
Timothy J. Texel
Executive Director and General Counsel
POWERED BY