Legalectric

There’s good news and bad news.  The good news is that the PUC did order that the Hiawatha Project transmission line be undergrounded.

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

The bad news is that NO ONE is addressing need, need has been presumed, despite lots of evidence in the record that the project is way way more than what is required for the claimed 55MW need, which in itself is questionable.  Silence…  Those who worked so hard to get a requirement for a Certificate of Need abdicated, zero follow through, after legislation passed to require a Certificate of Need, and it then wound its way through the PUC process, and there were NO intervenors.

Here’s the PUC’s deliberation:

AUDIO - Hiawatha begins at 16:50

It seems to end before they’re done, and there’s a note that complete audio will be posted later, so check back.  Right now there’s about 45 minutes and it ends as they’re going through exceptions to the ALJ report, a prelude to the ultimate vote.

Here’s the report in theSTrib:

Xcel told to bury new power lines across south Minneapolis

Article by: STEVE BRANDT , Star Tribune
Updated: January 12, 2012 - 11:15 PM

PUC decision protects south Minneapolis greenway, but doesn’t say how to cover extra $13.6 million cost.

++++++++

A state board Thursday ordered that new high-voltage power lines across the heart of south Minneapolis be buried underground but deferred the question of who should pay the extra $13.6 million cost.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission ordered that the twin 115-kilovolt lines requested by Xcel Energy be deemed necessary but said they should be buried under E. 28th Street.

That’s a victory for the city and a number of neighborhood representatives. They argued that an alternative route that would run lines overhead or underground along the bike-pedestrian corridor was too disruptive. “It’s a huge victory, said Soren Jensen, staff chief for the Midtown Greenway Coalition.

But the precedent-setting question of who pays will require a separate proceeding that will last several months and determine whether all Xcel customers in Minnesota will help bear the cost of burying the lines or just those in Minneapolis.

The city argued that all Xcel customers should pay because the factors arguing for burying the route are so compelling that any other route, including the greenway, would be unreasonable. Burial of the lines, the city said, should thus be considered a standard cost, borne by all customers, rather than a special accommodation whose extra costs should accrue only to Minneapolis residents. Xcel agreed with that wider-cost impact.

But the PUC wasn’t ready to make that precedent-setting decision now, telling Xcel to file its views in 30 days in a proceeding that will give other potentially affected parties a chance to comment.

“There is no precedent case just like this,” said attorney James Strommen, who argued on behalf of suburban cities in support of the city position. “The standard is not always overhead in all cases, in our view.”

At the PUC’s request, Xcel generated estimates of the amounts needed to pay off the extra cost of the buried lines. To do so in the standard five years, the per customer cost would be $12 if spread statewide, and $83.40 if levied only within Minneapolis.

Xcel estimates that the lines and two new substations at either end, at Hiawatha and Oakland Avenues, will cost $42 million. The utility will refine those costs as it does final engineering for the project; it plans to break ground later this year and start operations in 2014.

Xcel argued that since 2006, electrical demand has exceeded its capacity to reliably provide service to customers in the south Minneapolis area. Opponents argued that Xcel has further plans to bisect south Minneapolis with transmission lines, has overestimated demand and should substitute conservation measures.

The utility originally proposed that the lines be built within the Midtown corridor paralleling Lake Street somewhere between E. 31st Street and E. 26th Street. It said that a greenway route would be cheapest but that option quickly drew opposition from the recreation lobby.

The PUC’s decision largely followed the recommendations 15 months ago of Administrative Law Judge Beverly Jones Heydinger. She cited a 1993 court decision protecting the downtown Minneapolis Armory to find that reasons of cost, convenience and efficiency aren’t sufficient to impair a protected historic district such as the greenway trench and its bridges when alternatives exist.

Here it is, MTEP 11, the Midwest Transmission Expansion Plan for 2011 (CLICK HERE, look on lower right), and it’s in the news too.  The main report and some appendices:

MTEP 11 - Draft Report

MTEP Appendices A B & C

MTEP 11 Appendix A-1_2_3 - Cost Allocation

Page listing all the Appendices

MTEP Appendix e52 Detailed Proposed MVP Portfolio Business Case

Please take note that this includes not only the CapX 2020 Brookings-Hampton line (#2 on map), but also the LaCrosse-Madison line (#5 on map), the one they need to build or they’ve got a lot of system instability goin’ on.

From my perspective, the most important thing to be aware of is that MTEP 11, and the MTEPs that preceded it, are about the shift to economic dispatch and development of the electric market.  At the outset, MISO studied potential benefits of this shift, and found massive economic benefits, of which they speak in their press release.  The economic benefits are realized by optimizing use of lower production cost generation, and in their own words, to “displace natural gas with coal.”  Don’t believe it?  Read this study that ICF did for MISO:

ICF - Midwest ISO Benefits Analysis

This is the worst possible result for those of us who breathe, and means that tens of thousands of landowners will have very high voltage transmission lines on their land, taken from them by eminent domain.  These projects, almost all of the MTEP projects, are not about electric reliability, they’re “need” is to deliver market transactions of electric generation from any “point A” to any “point B,” and this is a private interest, a desire for market profits, and not a public interest.

Another issue looming is “what does MISO ‘approval’ mean?”  Transmission lines are regulated by states, individually, and there is a movement to strip states of their regulatory authority and transfer that to federal entities.  Look no further than Obama’s transmission “fast track” proposal, naming one of the CapX 2020 projects!  States must make their energy regulatory decisions in an open, transparent process and based their decisions on ratepayer and public interest.  That focus is not present in federal top-down edicts.  States’ rights are at issue and we need to keep on our toes so this power shift doesn’t slide through.

And it’s not “just” the ICF report above, that’s it’s all about coal is clear from prior press.  Here’s an important sentence, quoting GRE’s spin-guy Randy Fordice — explaining what we all know, that the MISO effort to get the “benefits” of displacing natural gas with coal:

They now consider the line to be a multi-value project since system reliability- and service to existing substations and existing fossil fuel plants- are also benefited, he said.

Coal with benefits, yesiree…  Gotta hand it to Fordice for being honest!

Yes, it’s true, the cow is out of the barn - and the National Park Service says that the “No Action Alternative” is the best alternative for the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line.  Can you hear PSEG and PPL squealing???

Big thanks to Scott Olson for the heads up, and this link:

Park Service: No line is best option

The bottom line, from page 16 of the pdf below, page vii of the actual document:

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
The environmentally preferred alternative is the alternative that would promote the requirements of the
national environmental policy expressed in section 101(b) of NEPA. It is the alternative that causes the
least damage to the biological and physical environment and that best protects, preserves, and enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources (CEQ 1981, Q6a). Alternative 1, the no-action alternative, was selected as the environmentally preferred alternative by the NPS. This decision was based on the available scientific data about the proposal and mitigation measures presented by the applicant and collected by NPS. An analysis of this data made it clear that alternative 1 best meets the requirements of the environmentally preferred alternative.

Really, that’s what it says… wow… I’ve never seen that before in a DEIS.  You can see for yourself here, again, p. 16 of the pdf, page vii of the actual document:

Here’s the NPS page with the whole thing:

CLICK HERE FOR NPS’ SUSQUEHANNA-ROSELAND EIS PAGE

Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. January 31, 2012:

From the site, there are three public “meetings” scheduled where you can make comments in person:

Tuesday, January 24, 2012
(snow date 1/31)
Fernwood Hotel and Resort
U.S. 209 Bushkill, PA 18324

Wednesday, January 25, 2012
(snow date 2/1)
Stroudsmoor Country Inn - Ridgecrest
RD#4 Stroudsmoor Road Stroudsburg, PA 18360

Thursday, January 26, 2012
(snow date 2/2)
Farmstead Golf and Country Club
88 Lawrence Road
Lafayette, NJ 07848

Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. January 31, 2012.  If you are unable to attend the public meetings, please submit your comments by January 31, 2012 via the internet at http:// parkplanning.nps.gov/DEWA or by mail to address below (there are two addresses below - best send to BOTH!):

John J. Donahue, Superintendent
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area &
Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River
HQ River Road, off Rt. 209

Bushkill, PA 18324

and

Pamela Underhill, Superintendent
Appalachian National Scenic Trail
P.O. Box 50

Harpers Ferry, WV 25425

Or by filing it at this site:

http:// parkplanning.nps.gov/DEWA

Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. January 31, 2012

O…  M…   D!

Gov. Mark Dayton has done it again, apparently looking to leave a legacy of being one of the most environmentally harmful Governors in Minnesota history.

And to think he’s a shep guy…

What’s this all about?  Well, for example, first there was his roll and cave on MPCA and DNR permitting, “streamlining” or gutting, as the case may be, beating the Republicans and their legislative agenda to the punch:

Dayton “streamlines” for corporate interests!

And then adding insult to injury:

Walton’s Bill Grant - Deputy Commissioner of Energy?

Now, by Executive Order, he does it again, this time to the EQB:

Executive Order 11-32

Check it out:

By November 15, 2012, the EQB shall evaluate and make recommendations on how to improve environmental review, given the changes made in Chapter 4, House File 1, and the recommendations contained in the Office of the Legislative Auditor Environmental Review and Permitting Report.

Here’s Chapter 4,  House File 1.

And now for the Office of the Legislative Auditor Environmental Review and Permitting Report:

Legislative Auditor’s Report - Environmental Review & Permitting

Questionairre Results from Project Proposers

Questionnaire Results from Project Commentors

The oh-too-cozy connections in Minnesota are pushing my buttons today. Wind on the Wires’ death-of-wind-as-we-know-it comments to the Public Utilities Commission  arguing a “this will affect all of Minnesota” were given way too much weight for an entity that wasn’t even a party, and given their tight and close connections to the Dept. of Commerce Energy Division head, it seemed undue influence.  But it got worse today… and suddenly, HOG PILE, lots of things came to light.

So what else happened?   Well, it’s a full moon.  I was looking for a document in my Goodhue Wind Truth file and my cursor passed over a WOW filing, Comments they’d filed in the record that I’d downloaded and filed with the rest, and as my cursor passed over it it said and I cursed:

Author: Alan Mitchell

Say what?!?!?!  Alan Mitchell, author of Wind on the Wires filings?

So I open it up and check the document properties directly, and sure enough, it says “Author: Alan Mitchell.”  Open it up and see for yourself:

Author: Alan Mitchell - Wind on Wires Comments November 15, 2010

Who is Alan Mitchell and why should anyone care if he authored comments?

Alan Mitchell is an attorney working on energy issues — he worked as the Asst. A.G. on utility siting at the EQB forever, during Nuclear Daze, I almost thumped him on the head when he made a DUH! admission we’d been fighting about for years.  He was there (Dwight Wagenius too) during Arrowhead and Chisago transmission, and retired I think in the Pawlenty administration exodous, around 2006? and went to Lindquist & Vennum, to work on energy issues, and then jumped to Fredrickson & Byron, at the same time Todd Guerrero did.

And there’s the rub.

Todd Guerrero represents AWA Goodhue Wind (community based wind my ass — can anyone spell “T. Boone Pickens” the owner of this project?  Last I checked, Anywhere Texas is NOT in Minnesota)  in the AWA Goodhue Wind fracas at the Public Utilities Commission and Appellate Court.  To check those AWA Goodhue Wind dockets go to www.puc.state.mn.us, click on the blue “Search eDockets” button, and search for dockets 08-1233 (siting), 09-1186 (Certificate of Need) and 09-1349 and 09-1350 (PPAs).

Todd representing AWA Goodhue and Alan for Wind on the Wires.  It’s too close folks — have you checked your “conflicts” file?  Oh, yes, that’s right, it’s not a conflict because their positions are in alignment, AWA Goodhue Wind and Wind on the Wires are both promoting this project, DUH!  So having Alan and Todd working on this together, well, it’s not a conflict, it’s not scumbaggery, it’s economies of scale, eh?  It’s something that we should know when presented with Wind on the Wires filngs, and their failure to disclose is something I’ll be mindful of, it shows their spots, not that the Commission give a rodent’s rump.

Not to worry, WOW has other pigs it’s also rolling around in the mud with.  There’s the matter of Bill Grant, former head of Izaak Walton League, who was appointed by Gov. Dayton to be the Deputy Commissioner of the Dept. of Commerce’s Energy Division and the Facilities Permitting shop.  And after all, Wind on the Wires is separate, eh?  Well, sort of, but wait, take a look at the first IRS 990 filing by WOW:

2009 Wind on the Wires IRS 990

Look closely, and take note that this IRS 990 was filed on November 12, 2010.  REMEMBER THAT DATE!  Just for yucks, let’s take a look.  The IRS 990 claims income of  and assets of:

$   706,500    Contributions and grants

45    Interest

$    201,524     Cash

$    505,000    Pledges and grants receivable

118 Prepaid expense and deferred charge

$1,130,084

And expenses?  Put on your seat belt:

Yes, that says $3. as in THREE DOLLARS.  EEEEHH?

Here is their lobbying report from Wisconsin — and then there’s Minnesota to consider too:

WOW - Lobbying Report - 2009-2010

And here’s the snippet from the Walton’s 990 reporting that expense:

Let’s see if I understand this — Izaak Walton League is reporting it as an expense on their IRS 990 and not registering with the state, and Wind on the Wires is registering their lobbyists with Wisconsin but reports nothing on their IRS 990.  OK, now for a closer look at that below!

Onward with the WOW 2009 IRS 990.  WOW says that 2009 was a “transitional year” and that:

Uh-huh… right.   “Majority of activity” with over $600k in expenses while at the Waltons, and $3 in expenses independently.  Uh-huh… uh-huh… As for $$$$, “The $423,442 capital contribution to Wind on the Wires is the IWLA’s “Project” net assets at the end of 2009.”  $432.442…

Sure, OK, let’s see what the Walton’s IRS 990 says about that.  Hmmmm, nothing about going independent, and this was filed August 27, 2010, almost 9 months after 2009 ended, you’d think they’d know what happened in 2009:

Here’s the full IRS 990 filing, see for yourself.  Wind on the Wires is the biggest program, income and expenses, that they’ve got going:

2009 Izaak Walton League IRS 990

And remember that Wind on the Wires claim of a “contribution of $423,442?  Here’s it’s $431,942:

The Waltons had $8,500 more at year end, and more importantly, as of the Walton’s 8/27/2010 “year end” filing of their 2009 IRS 990, it was owed to WOW, it wasn’t outgoing money — it hadn’t been paid as of their year end…

We’re in a time warp here.

OK, now for Waltons’ lobbying — their 990 reports $102,000 lobbying expenses in Wisconsin, via Lee Cullen of Cullen Weston Pines & Bach:

And who else does Lee Cullen lobby for?  Let’s see… In addition to “Wind on the Wires” (and remember, prior to the 2010 filing, the 2009 501(c)(3) status and independent filing, it was but a program of the Izaak Walton League) Lee Cullen lobbied for Citizens Utility Board in past years, and while representing the Waltons… errrrrr… Wind on the Wires, throughout 2007 to the present session, he also represented RENEW Wisconsin and ATC Management, LLC … ATC Management, LLC?  You mean ATC?  ATC?!?!?!  Yes, that’s right, AMERICAN TRANSMISSION COMPANY.

Oh, it’s getting too cozy in here… but as above, there’s no conflict, nosiree, no conflict at all, because WOW is in bed with American Transmission Company, their interests are the same, there’s no conflict!

Anyway, back to the date of the Wind on the Wires IRS 990 — it was filed November 12, 2010, just a week after the election, the election where a governor was just elected who shortly thereafter appointed the Walton’s Bill Grant, head of the Midwest Izaak Walton League, to be the Deputy Commissioner of Commerce, Energy Division, in charge of energy facility permitting.  Uh-huh…

And then there’s that WOW  Board of Directors.  More on that tomorrow or Tuesday, but for sure before November 17, 2011,  when Howard “The Slow” of ELPC hosts another bogus “Transmission Strategy” meeting.  I wonder who’s paying for that?!?!