“Nothing came of it. To us, it’s a moot point,” Tyreman added.
Tyreman couldn’t say much about the threat.
The Coroners Service is expected to release the identity of the victim today.
Will Delaware, like Illinois, sue FERC and PJM?
July 30th, 2015
PJM’s Plan for Delaware
Sure hope so — they’ve got it coming. Cost apportionment is a big issue, and for PJM, well, they’d taken their cost apportionment dream to FERC, got the FERC rubber stamp, but it seems they’ve not done a good job of it, according to the Federal Court — that’s old news:
Fast forward to today — turns out Delaware’s Gov. Markell is objecting to costs assessed to Delaware ratepayers, (though I’m not seeing any objection to the project itself coming out of Delaware). DOH! He’d better, this project does nothing for Delaware.
Here’s the PJM Planning doc that tells all:
Note on the first page the statement of need, of why this project is wanted — this is really important:
PJM specified that solution proposals must improve stability margins, reduce Artificial Island MVAR output requirements and address high voltage reliability issues.
So let me get this straight — they’re having stability and reliability issues and PSEG wants to reduce Artificial Island MVAR output requirements, and want to charge Delaware ratepayers for this? PUH-LEEZE… This is a benefit to PSEG, not Delmarva…
And look what our big-coal friends at ODEC have to say:
ODEC letter regarding Artificial Island 7-29-2015
This project taps into the new line that was built not long ago:
Delaware has no regulation of transmission need or siting — so utilities can pretty much do whatever they want. Further, it’s a FERC tariff, so the state doesn’t have anything to say about it going into the rates, and cost apportionment. Great, just great. So now Markell is objecting? It’s a little late…
Delaware needs legislation — legislation like a “Power Plant Siting Act” and a legislative requirement of a need determination for whatever infrastructure they think they want. They need legislation specifying that only Delaware utilities can own and operate transmission in Delaware (see House Bill 387 from the 2014 session). Here’s what House Bill 387 would have done (It would have been an effective good start, protective of Delaware!), establish that a utility wanting to construct and operate transmission demonstrate NEED! Here’s the wording, though it would require quite a bit more, and some solid rules, to be effective:
a.the need for the proposed transmission line;
b.the impact on the reliability of the transmission grid
c.the long term viability of the public utility proposing the line;
d.the technical engineering and operating expertise of the public utility;
e.the technology and design proposed for the new transmission line; and
f.the economic and safety impact of the proposed transmission line.
Here’s the report about this PJM approval from Jeff Montgomery, News Journal:
Disputed cost-shares remain in plan for new power line
Note this snippet:
And here’s the schedule for this project going forward from the PJM Board meeting yesterday:
Seems there’s an opportunity before the FERC ALJ. But before then? What is Delaware going to do? Well, take a look at what Illinois did when it didn’t appreciate the FERC Cost Apportionment scheme — they sued FERC and won, based on the notion that if they weren’t benefitting, they shouldn’t be the ones paying:
The FERC Cost Apportionment scheme was remanded, and it’s in settlement negotiations right now. What is Delaware doing in that docket? To review the public postings, go HERE and search for FERC Docket EL05-121. The next settlement conference is Thursday, August 6, 2015, starting at 10:15 a.m. in a hearing room at FERC HQ. Delaware is represented in this, at least there are Delaware PSC staff listed on the service list, Janis Dillard, John Farber, and Robert Howatt. So what are they doing about this cost apportionment scheme? Seems this settlement conference is just the place for raising a stink about the PJM cost apportionment scheme, to raise issues of “benefits” and “cause cost, pay” arguments. Are they showing up and speaking up for Delaware?
SPP Planning: It’s as if Clean Lines don’t exist!
July 28th, 2015
As if they don’t exist? Yes, and that’s because they don’t. That’s because they’re transmission projects in their own minds, and not in reality.
What? SPP, the Southwest Power Pool, dissing Clean Line? See for yourself! It’s as simple as doing a simple search of the SPP planning reports.
We know, Clean Line is all about Clean Line, but there’s a significant disconnect between what Clean Line is saying about SPP, claiming “approval” of its projects and incorporation of those projects into SPP’s plans, and the reality of what shows up in those plans. Or more correctly, what DOESN’T show up in those plans:
CLEAN LINE IS ABSENT!
PLAINS & EASTERN CLEAN LINE IS ABSENT!
GRAIN BELT EXPRESS CLEAN LINE IS ABSENT!
Whadda ya mean? Well, on November 19, 2012, Plains & Eastern Clean Line sent out this press release:
SPP Transmission Working Group approves Plains & Eastern Clean Line reliability studies
This press release was EVERYWHERE, with Clean Line jubilant, jumping up and down, so excited and so elated, and stated that:
The Southwest Power Pool’s (SPP) Transmission Working Group today unanimously passed a motion accepting that the Plains & Eastern Clean Line reliability studies completed to date have met the coordinated planning requirements.
And went on to say (emphasis added) that:
Clean Line is also pleased to announce that it recently submitted the Plains & Eastern Clean Line and Grain Belt Express Clean Line projects, both +/- 600 kV high voltage direct current transmission projects capable of transmitting 3,500 MW from the SPP footprint to external-to-SPP sinks, in each of the ITP20 Futures 1 through 4. The objective of ITP20 is to develop an EHV backbone (345 kV and above) transmission plan for a 20-year horizon. The assessment will identify a robust transmission plan that is capable of reliably and economically providing deliverability of energy to the SPP market while enabling policy initiatives. The current ITP20 process is the second Integrated Transmission Planning Year 20 Assessment (ITP20). The assessment is conducted in accordance with the SPP Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) Attachment O, and the approved ITP Manual. The assessment begins in January 2012 and is scheduled to be finalized in July 2013.
Here’s that 2013 ITP 20:
2013 ITP20 Report – Southwest Power Pool
Now check out the map of their ITP20 projects in this report — do you see either the Plains & Eastern or Grain Belt mentioned above on this map:
Nope, neither do I. I did a search of the narrative, and “Clean Line” isn’t even mentioned once!
And there are no ITP20s after that 2013 one above, either HERE on the ITP Assessments page or HERE on the ITP20 Documents page!
Oh, OK, so what about the SPP Planning and SPP’s STEP (not unlike the MTEP and RTEP!):
2015_STEP_Report
Do a search — nada… so I tried a search on “transmission” and blew up the computer. So the search function works and in this report also, there’s no mention of Clean Line whatsoever, be it Plains & Eastern Clean Line or Grain Belt Clean Line or just plain ol’ Clean Line.
And there’s nothing here either:
It’s only in the 2015 ITP10 SCOPE that there’s any mention of “Clean Line” and it’s only the Plains & Eastern Clean Line, not both, AND it’s only for sensitivity analysis. This is not being included as a project, contemplated or promoted.
And in the resulting 2015 ITP10? A mention in the list of sensitivities, and then three mentions on p. 103:
And in the SPP 2015 Final Near Term Assessment, not a mention:
When it comes to the scope of their next ITP10, Clean Line disappears, not even one mention, nada, again, not even an honorable mention as a “sensitivity” in the scope:
Meanwhile, Illinois is holding “public hearings” that are very limited for what a large project this is, and very odd, considering that there are pending Motions for Reconsideration in this docket (Grain Belt Express Docket #15-0277 online at ICC’s e-docket system at www.icc.illinois.gov).
Public hearings tonight and tomorrow in Illinois:
I’d hope that Illinois, Missouri, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Tennessee pay attention to this lack of incorporation of any Clean Line project into SPP Planning!
Oh, and of course, the DOE should be paying attention! Hey Office of Electric Deliverability and Energy Reliability, are you paying attention?
James McIntyre ID’d as man shot by RCMP
July 23rd, 2015
This killing is very disheartening. I’m shook. As one who spends an inordinate amount of time outside the doorway of nearly every utility infrastructure meeting, open house, and hearing, handing out flyers and greeting everyone as the come in (just attended this last round of GNTL, printer not working so no flyers to be handed out!), this killing by RCMP is most disturbing. When stationed outside meetings, I’ve been told to leave, to stop handing out flyers (pretty revolutionary flyers, too, telling people how to file comments on the records, urging them to show up at hearings), and I’ve been told to get off private property, that’s happened a few times over the years. And each time I’ve objected, “resisted” following their directions, standing my ground. I’ve also objected to police presence at these meetings — sometimes they’re called to keep an eye on things (?? exactly what and why??), and admittedly certain people, and I tell the organizers and the officers that I object, and stress that it has a chilling effect on participation. Now? Guess I’ll think twice, or maybe three times, about getting vocal when told to leave.
What happened in Dawson Creek? There was a tweet prior to the meeting saying “Anonymous splinter group (to) attend the scheduled meeting in Dawson Creek tonight starting at 6pm,” (seems to have been deleted?). One protester attended the open house, and he got rowdy at a meeting, it’s not clear exactly what happened, did he have a mask on or not, but it sounds like he dumped over displays and tore up maps, and then was asked to leave and he did leave the meeting without further hassle. Meanwhile someone called police. RCMP arrived on high alert, found a man at the entrance wearing a mask, according to statements, officers presumed it was same one disrupting the open house, they had an agitated back and forth with the man near the door, it’s reported he had a knife, in hand or in case on belt. RCMP shoots and kills him. The youtube shows the aftermath. Photos show a guy with hood up, Guy Fawkes mask on, hands in front of him. He visibly bled out on the sidewalk. Initially, it was reported that it was the same guy as was inside the open house, and then, many hours afterwards, they revealed that no, the man who was killed was not the same person who was causing the disturbance at the open house (not that causing a disturbance should be a death sentence), and the one causing the disturbance had left the scene, he was alive and well. There were also reports that the man shot and killed was involved in an unrelated domestic disturbance in the bar but that has disappeared from reports and appears not to be true. An apartment was raided, and it seems it was the “disruptors” family’s apartment.
Regional District wants BC Hydro to hit brakes on Site C
Site C Dam and Powerplant Not Needed
And let’s not have anymore gatherings about this project for a while, makes sense:
BC Hydro Site C protest in Vancouver cancelled due to concerns about violence
And:
B.C. Hydro delays Site C job fair events in three northern B.C. communities, citing safety concerns
But I sure hope everyone’s keeping in mind just who’s being violent here!
Alaska Highway News seems to be doing the most thorough coverage of this, and where else is this being reported? The man shot by RCMP outside the BC Hydro Site C meeting, about the proposed new dam project, was identified as James McIntire:
Police shooting victim identified as James McIntyre
Victim was an employee at another Dawson Creek restaurant
From Vice Media:
But wait… it gets weirder, an apartment was raided, and “I’m going to let you read between the lines on that” was the RCMP comment:
Ch. 7829 Rulemaking Comments
July 20th, 2015
Today in the inbox, this DNR Comment on the Chapter 7829 Rulemaking appeared:
Here’s the juicy part:
DOH! Brilliant! So I quick wrote this up and filed a few minutes ago:
Agencies have contributed so much when they show up, and now the DNR and DOT do show up and it’s so much appreciated! How can building the record and getting their comments in be anything but good! Let’s do it!! Let’s establish a distinct status for state agencies to participate in Public Utility Commission dockets!
RCMP shoots hydro dam protester? Nope, misidentified!
July 19th, 2015
.
When you’re challenging utility projects, be careful. The guy who was shot was misidentified, but he’s still dead, that won’t change…
There was someone disrupting the BC Hydro open house/meeting, tearing up maps, toppling easels, etc., and he was asked to leave and was escorted out. It seems it was another person who was shot! There’s been no claim that the disruptive person was armed or threatening anyone. There are reports that the man who was shot didn’t follow police instructions/didn’t listen to orders, something like that, and that he had a knife. SHOT?!?! KILLED?!?!
See below, confirmation that the “Site C protester” and the man who was shot are DIFFERENT PEOPLE!
Report from Red Power Media:
‘Guy Fawkes’ Masked Man Dead After RCMP Shooting at BC Hydro Open House
In the press:
Two men involved in fatal RCMP shooting in Dawson Creek (this one says he may had been involved in a domestic dispute in the bar)
Police say man shot in Dawson Creek was masked and aggressive (they’ve changed the headline on this article)
Dawson Creek police shoot man who refused to throw weapon away, witness claims
Fatal shooting in Dawson Creek not connected to “Site C”
RCMP fatally shoot man at BC Hydro information session
Two men involved in fatal RCMP shooting in Dawson Creek
Here’s the witness’ video, he saw them shoot him and started recording:
OH, CANADA…
Press conference – IIO’s Kellie Kilpatrick, executive director of public accountability with the Independent Investigations Office:
Site C protester and shooting victim were not the same man
Nearly 24 hours after a police shooting left a man dead outside a Dawson Creek restaurant, B.C.’s law enforcement watchdog was convinced the victim and a man who disrupted a Site C dam open house inside were one and the same.
They were not.
“We verified, verified, verified. At two o’clock I was told the same guy, at three o’clock I was told the same guy, then I land in Dawson Creek and I’m told ‘different guy,'” said Kellie Kilpatrick, executive director of public accountability with the Independent Investigations Office (IIO) at a media conference at 7 p.m. Friday.
Thursday night, the IIO and RCMP said the shooting occurred outside a public information session on the Site C dam, and that the man who was killed was “believed to be connected” to the disturbance inside.
Instead, the man who reportedly flipped tables and destroyed maps at the BC Hydro event is alive, while another is dead.
The IIO could not yet confirm what the victim was doing at the Fixx Urban Grill restaurant on the evening of July 16, but said he had a knife. Police shot the man after he acted aggressively and refused to comply with police instructions. He died shortly after. Little is known about him, as investigators have not released his name.
As for what investigators know about the man at the Site C event: “He’s alive,” Kilpatrick said.
According to Kilpatrick, the Dawson Creek investigation has been one of the most complex the office has encountered since it was created in 2012.
“Since the beginning of the operations of the IIO, we’ve not seen a case that has quite as many moving parts as this one,” she said.
“The RCMP as well as the IIO spent close to four hours last night confirming what we thought was the most relevant, most accurate information. To come speak to you now almost 24 hours later, and provide a significant change in the information is not something we typically find ourselves dealing with.
“That’s a fairly substantive clarification that needed to be made.”
It was a remarkable turn in a day that saw Dawson Creek and its police force thrust into the spotlight, and one of the most controversial projects in B.C. linked to a police shooting.
At about 6:30 p.m. Thursday, police shot and killed the man outside the front door of the Fixx restaurant. A video of the aftermath emerged online, showing officers with guns pointed at the man, who appeared to be holding a knife.
An open house about construction of the controversial $8.8-billion Site C dam was taking place in banquet facilities of the restaurant that evening.
According to an attendee, a man flipped tables and tore display boards illustrating the dam from their stands before being escorted out of the room.
Curtis Pratt was inside and said he did not hear shots, but later saw the body. He said the victim was wearing a mask, and he wasn’t sure whether it was the man from inside.
Kilpatrick did not have additional information about the protestor, but said “he never did come into contact with police.”
Her office is continuing to investigate the shooting. The officers involved have been sequestered, and it is not clear whether they will be charged, suspended or placed on administrative leave. The IIO also said investigators were not sure if the officers had tasers or other lesser means of force, which will be a key part of the investigation.
“That’s something our investigators have been following up on today. I don’t have the answer to that,” Kilpatrick said.
“What an officer carries on his toolbelt varies depending on officer location, detachment and the type of work they are doing.”
What is clear is that “police came in response to the disturbance and found themselves in contact with this other individual,” Kilpatrick said.
The IIO is asking anyone with information about what happened in the area to come forward, saying cell phone videos are of particular interest.
“In this day of social media, we aware that there is a lot of information circulating out there,” Kilpatrick said. “We’re very interested in speaking with anyone who has information about what they saw or what they heard here last evening,” she added.
Anyone with information is asked to call the IIO at 1-855-446-TIPS.