Legalectric

.

So what are they looking for? What do they see? Are they learning anything? They came to our meeting, and I hope they all grabbed all the handouts for a little light reading:

Moi and Ross Hammond at the intro…

Standing room only crowd at the Grand Rapids Library.

From the monthly report of the Itasca Economic Development Corporation:

Excelsior Energy â?? On July 25, the Citizens Against the Mesaba Project (CAMP) held their first public meeting at the Grand Rapids Public Library with approximately 100 in attendance. CAMP is a group of concerned citizens opposing the construction of a coal gasification power plant on the Scenic Highway in Itasca County. The groupâ??s stated reasons include: degradation of the recreational lake country; exacerbate global warming; air pollution; excessive financial risk; the small number of jobs available to local residents does not offset environmental and financial risks; and the use of eminent domain on private property owners. Mesaba Energy Action Team members and IEDC staff were present to increase their understanding of project opposition.

On July 26 the Western Mesaba Mine Planning Board and the Greenway Area Business Association, assisted by Mike Andrews, hosted a community open house on the Mesaba Energy project at the Bovey City Hall. Company management was on hand to explain and answer questions on all aspects of the project including infrastructure (transmission and pipelines), environmental, work force needs and overall economic impact. Approximately 60 people participated in the open house.

On July 31, Excelsior Energy announced the filing of applications for required preconstruction permits with the MPUC for the first two phases of the Mesaba Energy Project. The two phases of the integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power station will be constructed sequentially, with each phase having a nominal generating capacity of 606 MW.

When they say “60 people participated in the open house” would you believe 30 of them were consultants? Excelsior had a display, and they asserted that they “HAD” a Power Purchase Agreement with Xcel. Uh-huh… so you say…
We had 115, standing room only until a fierce storm cleared some of the room. Peter McDermott was there taking it all in, but I wonder who the “Mesaba Energy Action Team” is, and what their interest is! So are we ahead by 55?

Bob Evans earned his pay that night, he was on his own and had to directly address some issues that I’m sure they’d rather we forgot, and he did get a little green around the gills, above, when I brought up the Buy the Farm provision of the Power Plant Siting Act. Check it out — it’s something that each landowner must know about so they have a chance negotiating a reasonable easement settlement rather than go to condemnation court. Buy the Farm is where a landowner can require that the utility condemn all their land and not just a little bitty parcel for a little bitty pittance. It also as a big impact on cost of eminent domain proceedings by changing the stakes and it’s a bit of an equalizer in the power imbalance. And remember that although there were changes in our eminent domain law restricting takings for private use, UTILITIES WERE EXEMPTED. Gee thanks. What’ll it take for legislators to get that utility takings will be the majority of condemnation proceedings — I guess it’ll take CapX2020 to wake people up!

The first Citizens Against the Mesaba Project public meeting was a great success. Stop by their booth at the Itasca County Fair in Grand Rapids next Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday. And check out www.camp-site.info for more info about CAMP.

And of course for the bestest all around source for info on the Mesaba Project, check out www.mncoalgasplant.com! It’s hard to keep up with all the filings and documents flying around these days, so if you’re looking for something and don’t see it, let us know — send a note to info@mncoalgasplant.com.

Here’s the report from yesterday’s Grand Rapids Herald Review:

Setting up CAMP against Mesaba Energy

Britta Arendt
Herald-Review
Last Updated: Wednesday, August 09th, 2006 11:26:25 AM


There is a new camp on issues surrounding Excelsior Energyâ??s proposed project, Mesaba Energy.

They call themselves CAMP, or Citizens Against the Mesaba Project. A group of concerned citizens opposing the construction of the coal gasification power plant slated for construction near Taconite and the Scenic Highway, CAMP was formed after a Trout Lake Township meeting on April 20. At this meeting, dozens of residents came to hear from Excelsior Energy officials who spoke about the design, schedule and progress of the project.

â??I started following this fairly closely since they looked at the Scenic Highway as the preferred site,â? said Charlotte Neigh, a resident of Trout Lake Township who serves as co-chair of the group which has grown from an informal meeting between friends and neighbors into an incorporated non-profit agency with a board of directors.

â??We sat down last spring with about 15 to 20 people we knew, friends and neighbors and we said, â??None of us like this, what can we do?â??â? said Ed Anderson, also a resident of Trout Lake Township and CAMP co-chair who helped found the initiative. â??We didnâ??t want to be complacent so we began sharing information that each of us had gathered and eventually we established a board of directors.â?

From what started as just about a half dozen has now grown to hundreds of people who have shown interest in CAMPâ??s mission. An informational meeting on July 26 attracted about 80 people to the Grand Rapids Area Library where Neigh, Anderson and others presented their findings, their opinions and their questions surrounding the proposed plant. A new Web site has been established, detailing CAMPâ??s positions. And, according to Anderson, hundreds of people have shown interest, visited the site or requested further information on CAMP.

â??What brought us to this point is we all love the area where we live,â? said Anderson. â??Also, we wanted to be sure we were spreading accurate information because we believe the information that has come from Excelsior has been spun.â?

Within the informational packet CAMP is distributing, it explains, â??One year ago, when the preferred site for this coal gasification power plant suddenly changed from an abandoned mine site near Hoyt Lakes to a pine forest and wetland greenfield near the Scenic Highway, many local residents started paying close attention. It has been difficult to get good information about the project, especially with respect to why the Scenic site was chosen. After attending public meetings put on by Excelsior Energy, we had even more questions and felt a need to more fully understand the scope of this project. Weâ??ve read Excelsiorâ??s documents and have done extensive research resulting in a more complete picture of the Mesaba Project. What started as a group of individuals working to grasp the full picture became a committed, organized group of citizens very much opposed to this project.â?

After months of studying Excelsiorâ??s plans, members of CAMP have educated themselves on all sorts of new terms like â??syngas,â? or the product produced by exposing coal to high temperature and processes like IGCC, or integrated gasification combined cycle. They have researched various coal burning technologies and have weighed in the costs to tax-payers as well as potential effects on the health of the environment and the residents, like themselves.

â??There may be a win-win situation, but probably not,â? continued Anderson. â??They can do this technology in a better way than they have planned, but theyâ??re not.â?

Anderson explained that the IGCC process of carbon dioxide capture could be more cost-effective. Yet CAMP has found that even though IGCC may be cleaner than conventional coal burning technology, it still involves airborne emissions of mercury, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, arsenic and more. CAMP believes these emissions will be associated with increased smog, acid deposition and air pollution.
â??Most of the pollution will fall within five miles of the stack since they are proposing a shorter stack,â? said Neigh.

While Excelsior plans to use water from the Canisteo Mine Pit to cool the two plants, CAMP also has stated that this cooling increases the concentration of mercury, lead and arsenic in the cooling water. Anderson further explained that Excelsior has admitted that the process of releasing the waste cooling water has the potential to pollute the pit in the future.
â??First, carbon capture is important, if you can do it right; secondly, the financial costs shifted to the public is not fair; and, lastly, if they can prevent the pit from being polluted, why not?â? said Anderson.

Excelsior Energy has filed applications for required reconstruction permits with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) and other state agencies for the first two phases of the Mesaba Energy project as a 1,212 megawatt integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) electric power generating system. The plan is for the first two phases of the IGCC power station to be constructed sequentially. This filing is an important step in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process, which will be jointly prepared by the Minnesota Department of Commerce and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The joint application included requests for a large electric power generating plant site permit and routing permits for a high voltage transmission line and natural gas pipeline.

â??Weâ??ve been working off their documentation,â? said Neigh who explained that CAMP has reviewed Excelsiorâ??s application and is carefully following the permitting process.

On July 6, the MPUC accepted the joint application for the large electric generating plant site permit, the high voltage transmission line route permit and the natural gas pipeline routing permit as complete. In its filing, Excelsior Energy stated that, â??The Mesaba Energy project will give Minnesota and the nation much needed, new baseload power using a lower polluting technology for making electricity out of coal, the nationâ??s most abundant and stable domestic fossil fuel resource.â?

In order to get the financing needed for the Mesaba Energy project, Neigh explained that Excelsior will need a mandated Power Purchase Agreement from the MPUC which will force NSP/Xcel to purchase the power they hope to produce.

â??NSP/Xcel has said this would be too expensive,â? said Neigh. â??Excelsior admits that without the power purchase agreement, they canâ??t get customers.”

According to information obtained from CAMP, public funding for Mesaba Energy so far totals $55.5 million, of which $9.5 million is from the Iron Range Resources; $10 million from the state of Minnesotaâ??s Renewable Development Account and $36 million from the federal DOE. Also, the state is borrowing $12 million that may be spent by Itasca County for infrastructure for this project as well as the Minnesota Steel project.

â??We are not an agency that is against industry,â? said Anderson.

â??Weâ??re finding a lot of people have concerns, but thought there was nothing they could doâ??thatâ??s not the case,â? added Neigh.

â??A lot hinges on the MPUC; this is not done until mid-2007,â? added Anderson who has been selected to serve on a citizens task force set up through MPUC to review the application, site and local concerns.

For more information about CAMP, visit www.camp-site.info

.

TakeAction, recognizing a progressive when it sees one, has endorsed Julie Risser for Senate in Minnesota’s SD41 — no contest, she got over 70% on the first ballot. Risser is running for Senate in Edina and West Bloomington against incumbent Geoff Michel and DFL endorsed Andrew Borene.

Here’s Julie and her daughters from the MPR site. They covered the SD41 race earlier this week in “Edina is key suburban battleground this campaign.” There are parts of her campaign journal on their site. Here’s “It doesn’t cost anything to knock on a door.”

Take Action, the new political morph of Progressive Minnesota and MAPA, is an important endorsement because they support a PROGRESSIVE platform and values and have resources to help progressive candidates get their message out. TakeAction has a thorough candidate screening process, through which they target campaigns:

From their Campaign page:

We will be working hard in the upcoming months to return a progressive majority to our state legislature.

We will do this by:

• Targeting races (done by our political committee) to screen and endorse candidates
• Coordinating the work of our progressive partners so that our resources are used wisely
• Training and developing other good organizers
• Keeping the base energized & engaged by staying focused on the issues that matter to Minnesota — like good jobs, decent schools, and affordable health care
• Turning out progressive voters on Election Day through strong organizing and a great canvass.

This TakeAction endorsement is an important endorsement of her candidacy, which Julie proudly adds to those of Clean Water Action and the Progressive Women’s Caucus!

WAY TO GO, RISSER!!! (hmmmmmmmm… think she’s getting helpful hints from WI’s Fred Risser???)

.

Mark Ritchie and ol’ what’s her name were in Red Wing for a candidate forum, and here’s the report from the Republican Beagle:

Secretary of State candidates square off

And here’s the good, the unbelievable part — they agree on something! And that something they agree on is that the City of Red Wing has gone too far by instituting background checks of City Council candidates! Really!

Here’s the snippet from the article:

Oppose Red Wing candidate policy

Kiffmeyer and Ritchie found agreement on at least one issue: both said in interviews that they opppose the city of Red Wing asking candidates for City Council to sign a voluntary release form giving the city permission to conduct criminal background checks.

In a guest column in Wednesdayâ??s Republican Eagle, city attorney Jay Squires wrote that such a check â??provides assurance to the city of Red Wing and its voters that taxpayer dollars wonâ??t be wasted on a special election if, at some point, ineligibility is discovered.â?

Kiffmeyer said she understands the cityâ??s concern, but said itâ??s probably gone too far.

â??These are elected officials; theyâ??re not employees,â? she said, adding that it â??may have intimidated some peopleâ? from filing.

Ritchie also said the practice could discourage qualified candidates from stepping forward.

â??This seemed so over the top,â? he said.

Since my initial conversation with the County Attorney, I’ve not heard a PEEP about my Complaint.

Here’s the City Attorney Jay Squire’s “explanation” of the background checks as reported in the Beagle:

Guidelines explained for City of Red Wing’s elected offices

If you recall, Jay Squires is the attorney for the Northfield School District who objected to the District constructing and operating a wind turbine — said District didn’t have express authorization so couldn’t. And here the same guy says “there’s no prohibition.” Yeah, OK, so Squires, show me the express authorization for this RW background check that you thought so necessary for a wind turbine? You’d think that civil rights for citizens have a higher standard than nuts and bolts wind turbines… oh well… If I come across that AG Opinion on that I’ll post it, and lo and behold the law was changed, BUT the window of opportunity for Northfield passed and there were how many schools with wind turbines already… sob… thanks to Squires and his goofy perspective.

Found the AG Opinion to Squires about the wind turbine:

jay-squires-ag-opinion.pdf

It ‘s worth the read, looking at his approach, that you can’t do something unless authorized. Very different than his view of Red Wing’s intrusive background check.

Here’s Bob’s missive, helping folks prep for next week’s meeting:

Last week you received the attached meeting notice and agenda for an upcoming meeting at the Public Utilities Commission offices on August 15Â regarding the State Transmission Plan process, focusing specifically on ways to improve public participation. The following information is provided as further background for those who may not be familiar with how the process has developed since the 2001 enabling legislation. If you have questions, or comments, please contact me directly, either before or after the meeting.

Bob’s contact info is way down there, email is bob.cupit@state.mn.us

FYI, meeting is:

August 15, 2006
9 a.m. to 12 noon
PUC Large Hearing Room
121 – 7th Place E., St. Paul

Link to State Transmission Planning reports for 2003 & 2005 and zone map:

http://minnelectrans.com/Â Includes:

• Links to the public meeting presentations
• Utility Contact Information
• Web links & resources
• Public Meeting Summaries, 2005

216B.2425 State transmission Plan – Public Participation excerpt:

Subd.2c4. (4) provide a summary of public input related to the list of inadequacies and the role of local government officials and other interested persons in assisting to develop the list and analyze alternatives.

Link to transmission planning statute: http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP_SEC&year=2005&section=216B.2425&keyword_type=exact&keyword=state+transmission+plan

The State Transmission Plan is governed by Minnesota rules, Chapter 7848. Link to rule:

http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=RULE_CHAP&year=current&section=7848&keyword_type=exact&keyword=transmission+plan

Public Participation excerpts:

7848.0700 TRANSMISSION PLANNING ZONES.

To facilitate meaningful public participation in transmission planning, the state is hereby divided into six transmission planning zones: northwest, northeast, southwest, southeast, west central, and Twin Cities metropolitan. The boundaries of these transmission planning zones are shown in the map at part 7848.9900.

NOTICE:

7848.0800Â TRANSMISSION PLANNING MAILING LISTS.

Each utility shall maintain a mailing list, called the transmission planning mailing list, of persons who ask to be notified of transmission planning meetings and related matters. Each utility shall post on its Web site a telephone number and e-mail address that members of the public may use to place their names on this list.

7848.0900 TRANSMISSION PLANNING MEETINGS.

Subpart 1. Securing input of the public and local and tribal governments. Jointly or individually, utilities shall seek the assistance and input of local government officials, tribal government officials, and interested members of the public in identifying transmission inadequacies and alternative means of addressing them. To help secure this assistance and input, each utility shall hold transmission planning meetings as

follows:

A. at least one transmission planning meeting each year in each transmission planning zone in which the utility intends to propose a high-voltage transmission line within the next five years; and

B. at least two transmission planning meetings in each affected transmission planning zone in the year in which it files for certification of a proposed high-voltage transmission line.

Utilities may fulfill this obligation by holding joint transmission planning meetings. Transmission planning meetings must be open to the public.

Subp. 2. Issues to address in transmission planning meetings. At transmission planning meetings the utilities shall:

A. answer questions;

B. seek information on local transmission needs and related energy needs;

C. seek input on transmission inadequacies they have identified and input on different ways to address these identified transmission inadequacies;

D. present an overview of:

(1) the Minnesota transmission system;

(2) any inadequacies in the Minnesota transmission system that the utility believes must be addressed within the next

ten years and alternative ways, including nontransmission alternatives, to address these inadequacies; and

(3) the factors that influence transmission needs in the transmission zone, the state, and adjacent states;

E. provide a description of any high-voltage transmission line under serious consideration for construction within the transmission zone in the next five years;

F. provide a general description of each line’s probable social, environmental, and economic effects and an account of all alternatives considered;

G. present information on the best routing information available;

H. provide a description of general right-of-way requirements for a line of the size and voltage proposed and a statement that the utility intends to acquire property rights for the right-of-way that the proposed line will require; and

I. present a brief description of the regulatory approval processes to which each line is subject.

7848.1000 OUTREACH EFFORTS FOR TRANSMISSION PLANNING MEETINGS.

Subpart 1. Notice to interested persons. Utilities shall conduct outreach efforts to inform local government officials, tribal government officials, and members of the public about the transmission plan meetings required in this part. At a minimum, utilities shall take the following actions:

A. mail to each county government within the transmission planning zone written materials briefly summarizing the transmission plan process; inviting local government input; giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and inviting the county to designate someone to serve as a liaison between the county and the utility on transmission issues;

B. mail to each tribal government within the transmission planning zone written materials briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; inviting tribal government input; giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and inviting the tribal government to designate someone to serve as a liaison between the tribal government and the utility on transmission issues;

C. mail to the League of Minnesota Cities written materials briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; inviting input from the league and municipalities within the transmission planning zone; giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and inviting the league to designate someone to serve as a liaison between the league and the utility on transmission issues;

D. mail to the Association of Minnesota Counties written materials briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; inviting input from the association; giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and inviting the association to designate someone to serve as a liaison between the association and the utility on transmission issues;

E. mail to the Minnesota Association of Townships written materials briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; inviting input from the association; giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and inviting the association to designate someone to serve as a liaison between the association and the utility on transmission issues;

F. mail to the board, the department, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the United States Park Service written materials briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; inviting input from these agencies; giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and inviting each of these agencies to designate a person to serve as its liaison between the agency and the utility on transmission issues;

G. publish display advertisements in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the county seat of each county within the transmission planning zone briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; inviting public input; and giving the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting;

H. mail to all persons who have asked to be on the utility’s transmission planning mailing list and to all persons on the official service list for the previous biennial transmission projects report a notice of the date, time, and place of the transmission planning meeting; and

I. post on the utility’s Web site information about transmission planning meetings briefly summarizing the transmission planning process; identifying utility representatives who can provide further information; inviting public input; providing addresses, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses for public input; and giving the date, time, and place of upcoming transmission planning meetings.

Subp. 2. Timing of mailings. The written materials required under subpart 1, items A through F, must be mailed no later than 15 days before the transmission planning meeting to which they relate. The written materials required under subpart 1, item H, must be mailed no sooner than 30 days or later than ten days before the transmission planning meeting to which they relate. The newspaper advertisements required under subpart 1, item G, must appear no sooner than 30 days and no later than ten days before the transmission planning meeting to which they relate.

7848.1100 FOLLOW-UP ON TRANSMISSION PLANNING MEETINGS.

Utilities shall encourage but not require persons attending transmission planning meetings to sign an attendance register and to list mailing and e-mail addresses to which the utility can send transmission planning updates. Following each transmission planning meeting the utility shall prepare a synopsis of its presentation, public input received, and how the public input has influenced its decision-making process. The utility shall mail or e-mail this synopsis to all persons who signed the attendance register and listed a mailing or e-mail address, all persons who have asked to be on the utility’s transmission planning mailing list, and each transmission liaison designated under part 7848.1000, subpart 1. The utility shall also post the synopsis on its Web site.

7848.1200 KEEPING RECORDS RELATED TO TRANSMISSION PLANNING MEETINGS.

Utilities shall retain the following materials for ten years:

A. attendance registers from transmission planning meetings;

B. copies of written materials mailed or published under part 7848.1000, subpart 1;

C. copies of written materials distributed at, after, or otherwise in connection with transmission planning meetings;

D. mailing and publication lists for materials mailed or published under part 7848.1000, subpart 1, or otherwise in connection with transmission planning meetings;

E. copies of all written and e-mail comments on transmission planning issues received from members of the public, local government officials, and tribal government officials; and

F. copies of notes on telephone comments on transmission planning issues received from members of the public, local government officials, and tribal government officials.

Here’s Bob’s contact info, he’s been around long enough that he knows practically everything about transmission planning in Minnesota! Tell him you saw this on Legalectric!

Bob Cupit    bob.cupit@state.mn.us
Senior Facility Planner
Reliability and Facilities Permitting
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission

Phone: 651-201-2255

121 7th Place East, Suite 350
St. Paul, MN 55101-2147

www.puc.state.mn.us

Lookie what just appeared on my doorstep!

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!!

I’ll put a brass plaque on the wall…

It’s been a busy few days around the house, clearing things out, filing and filing and filing and then building somewhere to put it all — here’s the nuclear file, most of it:

And the transmission files, built a couple months ago:

This is why I need to build a garage in my lot across the street, here it is, now all I need is the dough…Â garage-drawing.pdf