Legalectric

I love it when this happens, it’s almost as good as the results of a google image search for “Excelsior yahoos” this morning:

ER13-1049 Order on Filing

Big thanks to a little birdie who relayed the good news:

hee hee hee hee hee, I LOVE it when this happens…

Today the public hearings continue for the Hollydale transmission project.

1:30 p.m. at the Medina Ballroom on Hwy. 55

It’s a 115 kV line proposed for Plymouth and Medina through people’s yards — not a good idea.  DUH!

For the full docket, go to the PUC’s Search Docket Page and search for 12-113.

Here’s how they present it in Figure 2 of the Certificate of Need application:

But here’s what it really looks like:

I’m representing a family that lives west of the “Focused Study Area” who just moved to Medina and were surprised by this project — no notice that it was proposed — and are challenging need for the project, and if need is demonstrated, supporting the A-2 distribution system alternative, an upgrade of the 13.8 kV system to 34.5 kV, distributed generation at the load along the area highways, and a combination that would address any demonstrated need:

Petition for Intervention — March 4, 2013

The parties had a phone conference Monday about Xcel Energy’s request to delay the evidentiary hearings (we aren’t formal parties at this point and weren’t invited, but thanks to “plays well with others” Xcel for the heads up about it):

Xcel Energy request for continuance (SF 716 attached)

And the response from Western Plymouth Neighborhood Alliance:

Western Plymouth Neighborhood Alliance

It’s odd delaying a project hearing for a bill that’s speculative, who knows if it might pass or not.  But it’s delayed, the evidentiary hearing, that is, until May or June sometime, after the legislative session is over, and details remain to be worked out.  I’d guess Xcel Energy has other reasons not to go forward with the evidentiary hearing on need for this line…

Not only is it Hizzonor’s Birthday today, but he now says he lives in Red Wing!  Imagine that!  Maybe he’s learning something in his old age?

More importantly, today both the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of Health said in Comments to Winona County that a full blown Environmental Impact Statement is needed for the Dabelstein Yoder frac sand mine proposed in Winona County.

Minnesota Dept of Health Comment Letter February 6, 2013

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Comment Letter February 4, 2013

This snippet from the MPCA letter pretty much says it all:

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff believes that the information provided in the EAWs is insufficient to fully identify and assess the environmental effects of the projects.  The MPCA believes the necessary information can be obtained and evaluated most effectively by preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  Consequently, we respectfully recommend that Winona County make a positive declaration on the need for an EIS for both projects and include within the scope of each EIS appropriate studies to abtain the lacking information as provided in Minn. R. 4410.1700, Subp. 2a, Item A.

The MPCA focused on “phased and connected actions,” looking at the multiple projects in the immediate area, operated by Minnesota Sands, LLC, and “cumulative potential impacts” addressing other projects that may interact with this one.  MPCA also listed many items where there was “insufficient” information.  What’s particularly surprising is that the applicants didn’t address air emissions, something that is so obvious, and which was an issue in the North Branch mining processing plant that was fined and shut down for operating without a permit.

The Dept. of Health was particularly interested in water,  including wells and groundwater quality, and again, air quality.  The MDH recommended a “Health Impacts Assessment” which would be a good way to characterize the issues and impacts on human health — as a part of the larger EIS — not in place of it.

This is an encouraging start.  Two state agencies have recognized the potential for significant impacts associated with frac sand mining.  Now let’s get to work and “do some digging.”  Can ya dig it?

Fun stuff happening at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  Remember the outrageous rates that FERC approved for CapX 2020 and PSEG’s Susquehanna-Roseland, over 12% rate of return on equity in this day of 3.25% prime rate?  Environment Northeast is taking this issue to FERC, and have filed a Complaint and are requesting that the rate on equity (ROE) allowed be lowered:

Environment Northeast (ENE) Complaint to FERC

Read this Complaint!  It’s very clear about why:

Based on economic data and Dr. Woolridge’s DCF [Discounted Cash Flow Model] analysis, the current base ROE [Return on Equity] of 11.14% is excessive.  In light of changed economic conditions and his DCF analysis, Dr. Woolridge concludes that the just and reasonable base ROE for the NETOs [New England Transmission Owners] is 8.7%.

Complaint Ex. C-1, p. 2 of 42.  Here’s Exhibit C-107, p. 2 of 2, Panel A, showing Moody’s Long-Term Public Utility Bond Yields — can you see why utilities are so fond of the FERC Return on Equity Orders?  This is not rocket science:

An interesting exhibit, well, ALL of them are interesting, but check Exhibit C-110, statistics for their “Electric Proxy Group” which includes some of our nearest and dearest utilities (click on charts for larger view):

And this one, also from Exhibit C-110, addressing comparative risk metrics for their group of utilities with the “Electric Proxy Group” which, again, includes some of our local utilities (note Xcel’s ratings of B++, And ALLETE/Minnesota Power’s A):

And 10 year US Treasury Yields:

FERC has issued Notice, which sets out how you can participate, including filing requirements and process:

FERC Notice – ENE Complaint Docket EL13-33

Initial comments, protests and interventions are due January 16, 2013.  Use FERC’s eFiling HERE!

If you are unable to file electronically (but it pays to figure it out and eliminate hard copies!), send to:

FERC

888 1st St. NE

Washington, DC  20426

Enjoy!

‘

Delaware Audubon Society will give Alan Muller its Conservation Award at its Annual Dinner, coming up on December 7, 2012.  Alan doesn’t like to toot his own horn, but that’s part of what I’ve got a blog for!  Please join us at the Annual Meeting and Dinner!

205 N. Market Street, Wilmington, DE

CLICK HERE FOR RESERVATIONS

If the link doesn’t work, go to the Annual Dinner site!

What’s the Conservation Award?  Well, in this case, maybe it’s a thank you, maybe it’s a send-off, maybe they’re just glad to see Alan spending so much time in Minnesota, but whatever it is, it’s recognition of all that he’s done in Delaware.

Special thanks to Matt Del Pizzo and Linda Whaley who are working so hard to pull this together.  Alan and Matt got a lot done back when Matt was head of Audubon not so long ago, and appreciated their ability to work together to make a difference in Delaware.

As a recipient of the Conservation Award, Alan’s in interesting company — we’re especially partial to 1988’s Jake Kreshtool, he’s pretty much adopted us and is the best mentor of activism we could hope to find in Delaware, an attorney who was on the Steering Committee of Green Delaware, and way way back, he fought the big transmission line crossing the Delaware River at New Castle.  Here’s their list of past recipients:

Here are two profiles of Muller:

The Eco-Activists – Alan Muller Profile

A Profile of Alan Muller of Port Penn: An Environmental Activist and Director of Green Delaware

A look at the work of Muller and Green Delaware shows how much he’s gotten done in a difficult environment, particularly Alan’s favorite accomplishment,  Delaware’s legislative ban of incineration.

www.greendel.org

Alan speaking at Macalaster for Neighbors Against the Burner:

Alan officing at Itasca State Park:

Alan at the raw sewage outlet (where’s that photo of him in his jailbird suit behind these bars?):