Legalectric

Tonight was the public hearing for the Menahga Transmission Project.  This is A transmission project with a pipeline driver.

This is a weird project.  They’re admittedly having problems with the old 34.5 kV distribution system, that was established ages ago in the GRE_Long Range Xmsn Plan_October 2008, and in the last four Biennial Transmission Plans (their application claimed that “this project” had been under discussion since 2007 as project “2007-NE-N3”):

2007-NE-N3_2007 Biennial Transmission Plan

2007-NE-N3_2009 Biennial Transmission Plan

2007-NE-N3_2011 Biennial Transmission Plan

2007-NE-N3_2013 Biennial Transmission Plan where it morphed into “2014-NE-N21”

Check the 2007 map for project 2007-NE-N3:

Does that bear any resemblance to the project they applied for:

Nope, there’s no resemblance, I didn’t think so either.

But I did find this interesting map of the “project area” that shows the 2007 area in question and more easily shows the logic behind their claim that:

There’s that green line right down the middle that’s the focus of the “problems” claimed.  And from that 2007 report:

The Hubbard-Menahga 115 kV line would be the start of a Hubbard-Menahga-Wadena/Compton-Wing River 115 kV line.

Walk through that list of cities, and you don’t get anything that looks like what they proposed.  It does indeed look a lot like fixing that green line that connects all the cities would answer their problems!

In the hearing, I clarified the capacity of the line, which at 140 is 7 times that needed for their 20 MW load (click for larger chart).  Go to the 477 on left side (kcmil) and then scoot over to the “115” column in the MVA rating columns on the right, scroll down to the “140.”  As the engineer confirmed, the 140 MVA is essentially MW…

And here’s the peak demand for the entire area, 16.48 MW, for which they’re wanting a 140 MVA capacity line:

Why?

Oh, well, there is that pipeline driver, the MinnCan pipeline over to the Koch refinery, and they want more pumping stations to increase the capacity from 165,000 barrels a day to 350,000 barrels a day.  And they want to double circuit the part on the northern end, from Hubbard substation to somewhere west of that for a “future GRE project” that they will not identify further, but they did not deny that it was Sandpiper (and $50 says it is).

The good news is that there’s tofu in the neighborhood for fortification, should get three meals out of this!

Yes, it’s TOMORROW!  Great River Energy and Minnesota Power want to build a transmission line to solve a distribution problem (age and overloads) and power up pipeline pumping stations for the MinnCan MPL Line 4 and for another “potential” project, oh, maybe, perhaps, the Sandpiper pipeline?

6:00 p.m.

Monday, October 19, 2015

Menahga Senior Center

19 Cedar Avenue

Menahga, MN  56464

For more information, check this Legalectric post:

A transmission project with a pipeline driver

You can see everything in the Public Utilities Commission docket, just go to DOCUMENT SEARCH HERE and search for either Certificate of Need docket 14-787 or Route Permit docket 14-797.

TOMORROW!

It never ends, does it.  Here’s the Great River Energy and Minnesota Power Menahga Project, a 115 kV transmission line doing the do-si-do around Menahga!  Pipeline driver?  Yup.  The new pumping stations will increase capacity of the MinnCan Pipeline (MPL Line 4) from 165,000 barrels a day to 350,000 barrels a day, or something like that.  It’ll double the capacity.  Great, just great.  And remember, the MinnCan pipeline was the one where no one cared about it, no one weighed in against it, and now, everyone everywhere is fighting pipelines.  This one quietly goes through, fueling the refinery in Rosemount, the Koch refinery.  Hmmmmm…

App_Part 1_CoverSrvList_20151-106198-01

App_Part 2_Summary_20151-106198-02

App_Part 3_Text_20151-106198-03

App_Part 4_Appendices A-f_20151-106198-04

App_Part 5_DetailedRouteMaps_20151-106198-05

App_Part 6_App H-J_20151-106198-06

App_Part 6_CORRECTED App J_20151-106872-01

App_Part 7_App K_20151-106198-07

And here’s what we filed last week and the judge’s response (DENIAL!!) and our response to that, and also today’s filing.

First, to get things moving:

Andersen_CoN and Route Permit – Request for Contested Case_FINAL

Andersen_Petition for Intervention-FINAL

And the judge’s response:

201510-114794-02_Order Denying Petitions

Suffice it to say, we weren’t pleased with that, so:

Andersen_Motion for Reconsideration

And today, to get this in before the Public Hearing on Monday:

Andersen_Petition for EIS_FINAL

GRE_Long Range Xmsn Plan_October 2008

It’s fall, the sun is rising on the other side of the house and bluff now, and I’m not ready!  Getting out to enjoy fall as much as possible, and then Little Sadie and I are heading to St. Louis soon for BaronFest III (didn’t have one last year).  Maybe down to Arkansas to catch fall later!  This is the first BaronFest where I don’t have a German Shepherd, and I’m not sure how Little Sadie will fare.

It’s hard to feel motivated to work with all this transmission going up here in Minnesota.  Earlier in the summer, we went down through Wabasha, and south of Wabasha where CapX Hampton – La Crosse cuts across the Mississippi River to Alma, through La Crosse and checked out the Briggs Road substation, host to CapX and Badger Coulee transmission, to Cassville and Dubuque and back up further west, a tour of electric infrastructure.

Don’t they have enough?  If they’re shutting down this coal plant, why would they need transmission?  How about using that capacity… oh, right, they get that 12.38% or thereabouts for building transmission, that’s their primary revenue source these days!

Time for a break…

Until then, I can vicariously enjoy my SiL’s trek along El Camino, and transmission lines too, in Spain.  Go, Jeanne, go!!!

Yesterday, the Arkansas Delegation hit Plains & Eastern Clean Line where it counts — a line drive to the Secretary of the DOE with this letter:

AR Delegation_Moniz_Sept 14 2015

Maybe this letter should have been headed “FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST.”  Plains & Eastern Clean Line applied under Section 1222 of the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005.

For reference, here’s Section 1222 of Energy Policy Act 2005.

Many of the points raised were ones brought forward in testimony, public comments, and media reports of the Plains & Eastern Clean Line transmission line proposal.  Questions the AR delegation raised include basic project information and:

• transactions and costs related to participation in Section 1222;
• obvious failure to qualify because it is not in a “national interest electric transmission corridor” under Section 216(a) of the Federal Power Act;
• improper use of Federal eminent domain authority undermining states’ rights;
• that the project is outside the statutory mission of federal Power Marketing Administrations (Southwestern PMA is proposed by Plains & Eastern Clean Line as partner in its project);
• project boundaries extend beyond the statutory boundaries of Southwestern Power Administration;
• costs for this private project could be transferred to electric utilities and their customers and this possibility has not been walled off/mitigated to insulate Southwestern’s customers;
• concerns about “non-completion” assessment of costs and prevention/mitigation have not been addressed;
• Clean Line’s assertions that they will pay certain taxes to local communities have not been investigated and verified;
• use of existing federal rights-of-way and federal land;
• Clean Line’s substantially incorrect, misleading, and/or inconsistent statements, which are basis for rejection or denial of the application, have not been addressed;
• draft EIS “did not meet the expectations of an inclusive, community-driven feedback process” expected of administrative agencies, and public comment periods and involvement of landowners and stakeholders was insufficient public engagement;
• questions regarding tribal consultation; questions regarding DOE position on state’s role in siting under Section 1222;
• impacts of traversing Mississippi Flyway on waterfowl and migratory birds, together with resultant economic and recreational impacts;
• impacts on public recreation on outdoor recreation in Arkansas;
• use of non-governmental email accounts for Department deliberations regarding this project.

Like WOW!  I’m impressed — this letter is a work of art.