Legalectric

A little birdie asked a question about need for Susquehanna-Roseland recently, and got me thinking.  This PJM press release came out a while ago and I forgot to post it.  It’s a legit PJM press release with an astonishing and crucial and decidedly “against interest” admission:

THEY ARE NOT USING DEMAND RESPONSE TO REDUCE LOAD!!!

Well, that makes business sense, they’re there to sell power, why refrain from selling it if they can!  They’re also wanting to build more transmission, which they can’t do if they can’t prove need!  And what better way to prove need than having a record peak demand?  But we know what they’re doing…  How many MW do they have in demand response, DSM, interruptibles, demand reduction by any name?  How much lower would the peak demand be if they had used it as they should?

Here’s their press release:

PJM and members set new record for peak power use

And here’s that telling admission:

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

… once more with feeling…

Demand response was not called on to reduce load.

How dare they… and then to claim a “RECORD” peak demand…

Slowly but surely, Delmarva Power/PEPCO is admitting the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway (MAPP) isn’t needed. We’ve weathered the weather, and they’re not even utilizing demand response, so where’s the need?  They’ve delayed this project, shortened it when they cut out the part through Delaware from Indian River Power Plant to the Salem nuclear plant, delayed and delayed, and now they’re REALLY delaying it, putting it off until at least 2019-2021.

Remember how the sky would fall and we’d be sweltering in the dark on a respirator without a job if this didn’t go through right away?  Well, guess again, and again, and again… the system is just fine, we can turn the lights on, we’re OK, and this line still isn’t needed and won’t be, probably ever!

MAPP PHI announces delay in project 8-19-11

From MAPP’s corporate parent, PEPCO Holdings Inc.:

As the Environmental Coordinator for the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway (MAPP), I want to provide you with a brief update on the project.

As you may recall, MAPP is a proposed, high-voltage, electric transmission line that Pepco Holdings, Inc. (PHI) plans to build, beginning in northern Virginia, crossing the southern and eastern shores of Maryland, and ending in Delaware.

I want you to know that PHI has notified the Maryland Public Service Commission and Virginia State Corporation Commission that the company is requesting temporary delays in the Commissions’ reviews of the respective applications filed by the utility’s subsidiaries, Pepco and Delmarva Power, for state regulatory approval of MAPP. These requests were filed after PJM Interconnection’s recent analyses indicated that the MAPP in-service date should be moved from 2015 to the 2019-2021 time frame. (PJM is the operator of the regional electric power grid).

However, PJM is also currently evaluating the criteria it uses to determine the need for transmission projects. Once this process is completed, PJM will reassess the need and timeline for transmission expansion in the region.

At this time, PHI will review the work required to support MAPP based on the new in-service date, and will keep you informed on subsequent developments regarding this project.

Please be assured that PHI and PJM are dedicated to maintaining the reliability of this region’s transmission system, and will continue to analyze the need for new transmission projects that provide safe and reliable service for customers.

For additional information about MAPP, please visit the project website at www.powerpathway.com or contact me via phone at 302-283-6115 or e-mail at mark.okonowicz@pepcoholdings.com.

Also, members of our MAPP team would be happy to meet with you in person to discuss the project. Please let me know if you would like to have a meeting scheduled.

Sincerely,
Mark Okonowicz
MAPP – Environmental Coordinator

There a link on the Press Release to a PJM letter:

PJM’s MAPP Letter to PEPCO

The MAPP transmission project is needing a DOE EIS because they’re getting DOE funding for it.  What’s the status on that?  D-E-L-A-Y… delay delay delay…

DOE’s Key EIS Schedule

The MAPP EIS doesn’t seem to be happening… The DOE site says that it was to be released next month, or maybe December, but rumor has it that the DOE is waiting on info from the applicants… delay delay delay… and in the meantime, the DOE is still accepting (sounds like REQUESTING) Comments:

Community and Environmental Defense Services states that:  While the Scoping comment period ended April 4, 2011, DOE will continue accepting comments, which should be directed to:

Douglas Boren
Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC–54)
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585
Douglas.Boren@hq.doe.gov
Fax: 202–586–7031
202–287–5346

Again, contact info if you’d like to send a “Thank You” note of appreciation  to Mark Okonowicz and PEPCO for admitting what we’ve all known all along, that this MAPP transmission line is not needed:

302-283-6115

or

mark.okonowicz@pepcoholdings.com

First, the bad news – the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has affirmed the Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission approving the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission project:

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania – Affirms Pennsylvania’s S-R Order

And now, on to the pressure… The National Park Service is working to do it’s job as steward of our national park land, in this case, the federally declared Wild and Scenic Delaware River and the Delaware Water Gap.

Seems that some don’t think they should be allowed to do that job, and are pressuring them to “hurry up” so the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line can steamroll on through.  Well, BACK OFF!

Today the pressure on NPS was overt in two venues.  First, U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent (R-PA) amends a bill to push the NPS to complete its environmental review one year ahead of schedule.  Say what?!?!?!

Then in my inbox a sour grapes press release from FERC Commissioner Phillip Moeller whining because the newly adopted rule won’t do what he wants, it won’t address “problems” like NPS doing its proper review of transmission projects:

July 21, 2011 Press Release – Phillip Moeller Whines

Here’s the Susquehanna-Roseland specific part:

“While I offer substantial praise for today’s final rule, the Commission should have taken a different approach to several important issues.  We must recognize that all of the nation’s difficulties in building needed transmission will not be resolved by this rule.  Rather, this rule largely addresses planning for long-distance transmission lines, which is only a subset of the critical issues that are inhibiting needed investment.

This rule cannot address issues like the delays caused by other federal agencies in the siting of important projects, as this Commission lacks the legal authority to require other federal agencies to act.  For example, see the comments of PJM in this proceeding at p. 17, which state that:

[t]he PJM Board approved the Susquehanna-Roseland 500 kV line in 2007.  The Susquehanna-Roseland line was approved by the state regulatory commissions in Pennsylvania and New Jersey for 2012.  The line is currently delayed by the National Parks Service [sic] and is not expected to be in service until 2014 at the earliest.

Ohhhhhhhh, isn’t it too bad.  He’s just one Commissioner, and he’s got to put his dissent out there as an extensive and extended rulemaking proceeding closes… Why is he pushing, why does he care, and why does his care rise to the level that he sends out a dissenting press release?  Lighten up, the National Park Service has a job to do.  As the testimony in the Susquehanna-Roseland proceeding before the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities reflects, we are NOT going to freeze in the dark in an incubator without a job…

And here’s Pre. Charlie Dent’s whine:

Charlie Dent pushes expedited federal review of Susquehanna-Roseland power line proposal

Published: Thursday, July 21, 2011, 4:30 AM
By Tom Rowan Jr. | The Express-Times

U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent is pushing for the National Park Service to complete its review of the controversial Susquehanna-Roseland power line proposal sooner than planned.

And the New Jersey Sierra Club wants Dent, R-Lehigh Valley, to back off.

Dent amended a bill approved July 12 by the House Appropriations Committee to call on the park service to finish its environmental impact statement on the project by 2012 rather than 2013.

“The committee is concerned about delays,” reads Dent’s amendment to the Fiscal Year 2012 Interior and Environment Bill.

The Sierra Club this week issued a release claiming Dent added the amendment in an attempt to “handcuff the park service from doing their job in complete violation of the public trust” and “undercut the National Park Service and push an environmentally destructive and unnecessary project.”

First pitched in 2008, the Susquehanna-Roseland line has been described by the two power companies behind the plan — PPL Electric Utilities Corp. in Pennsylvania and Public Service Electric & Gas in New Jersey — as necessary to bolster the region’s power grid. The 130-mile power line is proposed to link the Berwick, Pa., area to Roseland, Essex County.

The 500-kilovolt line is being evaluated by the park service because the route, as approved by New Jersey and Pennsylvania utility regulators, crosses the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area and other federal lands.

“The timely completion of the impact statement is of great importance to the reliability of the regional grid and is critical to the supply of electricity to 58 million consumers in 13 states and Washington, D.C.,” the bill reads.

The National Park Service earlier this year pushed its goal to finish the impact statement back from fall 2012 to January 2013, after the utility companies asked the agency to include another alternative in their review.

“Instead of standing up for our open spaces, Dent is working for PSE&G and PPL,” Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, is quoted as saying in the statement.

Collin Long, spokesman for Dent, responded Tuesday in an e-mail, “The congressman’s amendment does not show favor toward any of the alternatives being considered and respects the integrity of the environmental impact statement.

“It simply requires the National Park Service to follow their own timeline for completion of the review process, which already includes a six-month extension of their original deadline to October 2012.”

The appropriations bill awaits consideration by the full House of Representatives. When considered on the House floor, it will be open for modification through the amendment process.

If it passes through the House, it would be referred to the Senate.

DUH! We all know what the point of the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission is, PSEG! Back during the Susquehanna Roseland hearing, I introduced a FERC filing reflecting the 660MW transfer across the river to New York, that was what, a year and a half ago now?

Ex. 12 – STL D 16c – FERC Compliance Filing

So how is this Firm Transmission Withdrawal Rights for 685MW and 330 MW is news?  The NJ BPU was NOT in the dark about this…

Now where’s that other 670MW… Exhibit 96…  it’s in here somewhere… here’s a post from November, 2009:

How far down does electrical demand have to go…

Here’s yesterday’s piece from the New Jersey Spotlight:

Federal Agency OK’s Power Transfer from New Jersey to New York

Interconnect likely to lead to higher electricity prices and greater congestion on the grid — along with possible summer blackouts

By Tom Johnson, June 30 in Energy & Environment

New Jersey has lost another battle with federal regulators, a setback likely to lead to higher electricity prices for consumers in the state.

Over the protests of the state Board of Public Utilities (BPU), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday approved an interconnection request to allow 660 megawatts of power to be transferred from the Public Service Electric & Gas (PSE&G) Ridgefield substation to a Consolidated Edison West 49th Street substation in Manhattan.

Beyond increasing energy and capacity prices for ratepayers here, the state agency argued the interconnection would negatively affect reliability in northern New Jersey, which is already projected to face the possibility of brownouts beginning in summer 2012.

By drawing power from New Jersey, opponents of the project argue it will increase congestion, driving up the cost of power and capacity. Power suppliers receive capacity payments to have power plants in reserve to deliver electricity at times of peak demand.

The power line to the lucrative New York City market is being developed by Hudson Transmission Partners LLC.

New Jersey has found itself in an increasingly combative relationship with the federal agency. Because of high energy costs, the state approved a pilot program to have ratepayers subsidize the development of three natural gas-fired power plants. But as the state’s filing noted, that effort will be impeded by actions taken by the federal agency governing how power plants bid in capacity auctions.

The state had sought either to have the agency reject the interconnection agreement between Hudson, the New York Independent System Operator and Con Ed or to hold a proceeding to debate the issue.

In rejecting the state’s request, the federal agency ruled the sole issue in the matter involved the interconnection agreement, saying reliability and other concerns had been addressed in prior proceedings.

Greg Reinert, a spokesman for the BPU, said the agency is disappointed with the decision. “It imperils further our system, and its reliability.” He also said it seems inconsistent with recent rules adopted by FERC. In the past year, state regulatory officials have grown increasingly frustrated with actions taken by FERC and the PJM Interconnection, which operates the regional power grid serving more than 50 million people. They have intervened in a number of cases, including efforts by PSE&G to obtain special incentive rates for transmission projects they are developing, as well as a proposed natural gas pipeline that would run through Jersey City and into New York City.

Here’s the recent “eagle drops fawn on transmission line” incident:

Close, but not quite a moose:

And if snopes says it’s TRUE it must be!