hiawathaprojectplusmap-3(above - Overland’s take on what’s really happening here, that Hiawatha is “B to C” of a much larger project, one that’s been in progress for years, check the upgrades at that 280 and East Hennepin substation, and at the Wilson sub at 494 and Nicollet, if you want some concrete and steel proof)

Comments are due tomorrow by 4:30 on Xcel Energy’s Hiawatha Project.  Send to:

Beverly Jones Heydinger, ALJ

Office of Administrative Hearings

P.O. Box 64620

St. Paul, MN  55164-0620

or email:

beverly.heydinger@state.mn.us

Some documents you might want to check out are:

Xcel’s filing today - Substation location maps

For an even better showing of substations and which serve what area, where you can see that the Southtown Sub stretches to the southwest beyond the study zone, and that Aldrich serves a significant part of the study zone, and St. Louis Park a little bit.  Check the Application, Appendix A, p. 24 of 102 (click for larger version):

appa1-p24of104

And be sure to take a look at the Zima Schedule 2 and 3, I particularly like Sched. 3, that shows that there is a lot of wiggle room there for the transformers, look at Aldrich, even Elliot Park with the smaller transformers.  Here’s Schedule 3 — click for a larger view.

greaterareasubstationxfmrloadhistoryforecast

Here are the exhibits that I entered at the public hearing:

10-694 - Ex. 27 - South Mpls Electric Reliability Study

10-694 - Ex. 28 - South Mpls Electric Distribution Delivery System Plan

10-694 Ex. 29 - pages from 2007 Transmission Plan

10-694 Ex 30-MAPP NM-SPG Meeting Minutes 7/24/2008

10-694 Ex 31 From SW MN 345kv Application, Appendix 7 Conductor Specs

Two things to check out to compare with their “forecasting” for this project:

MISO’s Futures Matrix for MTEP 12

MISO Peak Forecasting Metholodogy Review Whitepaper 2011

PSEG’s mowing trees today

October 22nd, 2011

pseg_logo

“We make things work for you.”  Oh, ja,  sure, you betcha…

And then there’s Obama’s “fast tracking” and PSEG’s Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line is one of the seven transmission lines Obama picked to ram through.  Northwestern New Jersey is beautiful, a lot like the Minnesota “Range,” lots of rugged terrain, granite, and pine trees.  My clients, Stop the Lines, are based in Newton, NJ, and Fredon Township, which are just west of the New Jersey Highlands, and just east of the Delaware Water Gap.  It’s is such beautiful country.  Not for long if PSEG has anything to say about it.

susquehanna-roseland

Guess what they’re doing at 7 a.m. on a beautiful fall morning?  THEY’RE MOWING TREES DOWN:

pseg-clearcut

This is a view off Verdona Road, a cul de sac off of Stillwater Road in Fredon Township.  They started on Tuesday, and were out there today at 7:00 a.m. mowing down everything down to dirt.  There was no notice to landowners and neighbors, just equipment out there clearcutting everything.

I’ve asked neighbors for more photos, will post if they arrive in the inbox.

map1

Today are the public hearings for the Xcel Energy Hiawatha Project Certificate of Need for a transmission line through the Phillips Neighborhood.

Testimony filed by Xcel

Read the testimony, and check out Appendix A of the Application!  To look at everything that’s been filed in this docket, go to www.puc.state.mn.us and then click the blue “Search eDockets” button and search for docket 10-694.

The Routing docket Intervenors fought hard to get legislation passed to require a Certificate of Need for this project and they got it.  But here we are at the end of the Certificate of Need proceeding,  and not a single one of them intervened in this Certificate of Need docket.  THERE ARE NO INTERVENORS!  So it’s up to the public to ask the questions and demand the answers.

Monday, October 10, 2011

2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.

Plaza Verde, 1516 East Lake Street

Minneapolis, MN  55407

Be there or be square!

Aside from unprecedented corporate toadyism?  Bowing to corporate greed at public expense?  Methinks it means that the feds are stomping on states’ rights, and the states will fiercely fight to preserve their authority.   Despite assurances by DOE’s Lauren Azar that they won’t be doing anything they already can’t do, I’m beyond skeptical.

The feds will have one big fight on their hands, a la the fight about states’ rights, whether for consultation on NEITC transmission or their right to deny transmission permits under the NIETC regs:

NIETC designation of corridors tossed out by 9th Circuit Court!!

Denial is NOT withholding… Piedmont v. FERC

Obama’s transmission push is ostensibly based on a Memorandum of Understanding that was signed by federal agencies, note that it is about “federal lands.”

Memorandum of Understanding - 2009

CLICK HERE for the page that claims they’ll “expanding the scope of activity beyond federal lands.”  How long before they change that sentence?!?!

For lots of info about this from a more easterly perspective check here:

The Power Line: A View from Calhoun County

Here’s what it could mean in practice - a $60 million pay-out to allow the line to go through:

Obama Administration Draws Criticism For Fast-Tracking Transmission Line Project Through National Park Units

Submitted by Kurt Repanshek on October 10, 2011 - 1:41am

A decision by the Obama Administration to fast-track seven power transmission line projects, including one through several units of the National Park System, has drawn condemnation from conservation groups.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says the fast-tracking shows the administration’s commitment to developing “the kind of critical infrastructure we should be working together to advance in order to create jobs and move our nation toward energy independence.”

But the secretary seems tone-deaf to groups that oppose the transmission project that would run across the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and through the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area and the Middle Delaware National Scenic River.

“The Obama Administration has failed to protect three popular national park sites in New Jersey and Pennsylvania with today’s decision to include the controversial Susquehanna-Roseland power line project on its list of fast-tracked transmission projects,” said Bryan Faehner, the National Parks Conservation Association’s associate director for park uses.

“Susquehanna-Roseland proposes to build massive 200-foot towers and power lines across the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, the Middle Delaware National Scenic River, and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Delaware Water Gap alone enjoys more than five million visitors annually – most of which come from nearby urban areas – seeking the park’s inspiring views and outstanding recreational opportunities,” he added.

“Building massive power lines across these parks will harm the very resources they were designated to protect. This development can only harm visitors’ experience to the parks and puts economic benefits to local communities at risk. Unlike other proposals mentioned on the administration’s list, the Susquehanna-Roseland power line proposal would not help bring renewable energy sources on-line. Instead, it would transmit electricity produced by dirty coal-fired power plants.”

Last month Delaware Water Gap officials announced that a new alternative developed by the applicants has been added to their environmental analysis of the project, alternative 2b. Alternative 2b would be built within the existing right-of-way of the applicants’ original proposal, alternative 2.

“Under alternative 2b, the applicants would not request any additional ROW. They have stated they can safely operate the new line within the existing ROW, which has some sections 100 feet in width,” the NRA officials said at the time. “Construction would still require additional clearing for access roads and other features.”

The administration’s announcement last week to fast-track the project also was criticized by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which said the decision “is a move to bypass proper environmental review designed to protect one of the most scenic areas of the entire national park system.”

“We do not object to fast-tracking projects as long as political appointees follow the laws protecting parks and the environment–but that hasn’t happened here,” said PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch in a press statement. “Using jobs as a pretext is misplaced. More jobs can be created by protecting parks than by trashing them.”

PEER contends that Secretary Salazar, National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis, and other Interior officials have met repeatedly with project proponents, PPL Electric Utilities of Allentown, Pennsylvania and Public Service Electric and Gas Company of Newark, New Jersey, and have already approved a route for a new power line that will cut across the Delaware Water Gap NRA and the Appalachian Trail.

As part of the deal, PEER said the draft EIS will not consider at least two alternatives that would lessen impacts to the park’s scenery but will include at least one alternative (2B) demanded by the companies that is untenable from a safety perspective. The secretary and the director have unofficially committed to the companies that the NPS will select Alternative 2, the alternative preferred by the companies but which is the most damaging to the resources and scenery of the parks, PEER argued. In return, the companies have reportedly agreed to pay $60 million for land acquisition and administration inside and near the NRA.

“This is not ‘fast track,’ it is a short circuit in which political appointees are putting their thumbs on the scale to skew the review process,” Mr. Ruch added. “It is one thing to select an alternative after the conclusion of the NEPA process, but is something else to decide on the alternative before public comment has even begun.”

© Copyright 2011 National Park Advocates, LLC.

manurespreader

What does Obama’s transmission “streamlining” “fast track” agenda mean for states’ authority over need for and routing of transmission?

What does Obama’s transmission “streamlining” “fast track” agenda mean for federal agencies charges with NEPA environmental review of these transmission projects?

What does Obama’s transmission “streamlining” “fast track” agenda mean for public participation and due process?

Does Obama have a clue how many landowners/voters are affected by CapX 2020?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$

These are TWO of my transmission projects he’s targeting, TWO, the CapX 2020 Hampton-LaCrosse transmission line and the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line.  Here’s the Dept. of Interior Press Release:

Obama Administration Anounces Job-Creation Grid Modernization Pilot Projects

Susquehanna-Roseland in the news:

Stop The Lines Press Release www.stopthelines.com

Obama administration will push Susquehanna-Roseland power-line, could be first project to be fast tracked

Federal Government Recognizes Need for Swift Action for Permits on Susquehanna-Roseland Power Line - PPL Press Release!

Obama backs power line upgrade that passes through Morris County

I guess we know why he was in Cannon Falls… at least part of it… I hate to think what else might have been on the agenda.

Here’s what’s flying out in the press about Obama’s Transmission Toadyism and CapX 2020, many are pretty much just a cut and paste of the White House press release:

Rochester Post Bulletin:  Obama Administration to fast track CapX 2020, other power-line projects

Minnesota Public Radio:  Obama seeks fast track for powerlines in Minn., elsewhere

Here’s one with some substance:

Feds step up power line projects in 12 states, including one in Wisconsin

The Obama administration moved Wednesday to speed up permitting and construction of seven proposed electric transmission lines in 12 states, including one between Minnesota and Wisconsin, saying the projects would create thousands of jobs and help modernize the nation’s power grid.

The projects are intended to serve as pilot demonstrations of streamlined federal permitting and improved cooperation among federal, state and tribal governments. The projects will provide more than 3,100 miles of new transmission lines in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

In all, the projects are expected to create more than 10,000 direct and indirect jobs, help avoid blackouts, restore power more quickly when outages occur and reduce the need for new power plants, officials said.

In Wisconsin, a transmission company spokeswoman responded positively to the announcement. “We welcome any developments that help facilitate permitting of transmission infrastructure, especially as it related to permits from federal agencies. Sometimes those permits can drag along and any help in keeping projects on schedule is welcome,” said Jackie Olson of American Transmission Co.

ATC, which controls nearly 10,000 miles of high-voltage power lines in Wisconsin and the Upper Midwest, is not involved in any of the seven projects.

But opponents of the line between Minnesota and Wisconsin are raising concerns. It’s not clear what would be involved in fast-tracking the plan, said attorney Carol Overland of Red Wing, Minn. The line is part of a series of transmission projects extending from the Dakotas to Wisconsin known as CapX2020. Overland said the states involved have been going through their procedures without any delay.

“What this, to me, feels like is a threat to the states saying, ‘you put it through or we’re coming in,’” said Overland, who represents the citizens group No CapX2020. “I don’t see any basis for it. The state has to retain control … because we have to live with these projects.”

ATC is making plans for the Badger-Coulee line, a high-voltage transmission line that could connect to CapX2020 and extend southeast to Dane County. The company has been seeking public comment about potential routes.

State Journal reporter Judy Newman contributed to this report.

Once more with feeling:

What does Obama’s transmission “streamlining” “fast track” agenda mean for states’ authority over need for and routing of transmission?

What does Obama’s transmission “streamlining” “fast track” agenda mean for federal agencies charges with NEPA environmental review of these transmission projects?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$