Legalectric

.

Yes, indeed, PSEG is making things work for us…

PSEG has announced through its 2Q report that the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line will be delayed until at least 2015.  Just like the Brookings line part of CapX 2020!  Funny how that works.

PSEG – 2nd Quarter – Press Release

Here’s what they said in this about D-E-L-A-Y of the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line – two little snippets:

Ralph Izzo indicated that PSE&G has notified the PJM Interconnection that the in-service date for the eastern portion of the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line has been delayed by 2 years to 2014 with the in-service date for the western portion of the line delayed until 2015. He added, “We are disappointed by the delay, but look forward to meeting the region’s reliability requirements in partnership with our regulators and PJM.”  The delays are due to on-going environmental permit reviews.
…

PSE&G notified PJM that it has not obtained certain environmental approvals that are required for completion of the Eastern and Western segments of the Susquehanna – Roseland transmission line. Consequently, at this time, we do not expect the Eastern portion of the line to be in service before June 2014, and we do not expect the Western portion to be in service before June 2015.

You can learn more about the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission project at www.stopthelines.com!

Interesting 2Q report, some pretty juicy dry numbers here, look how far down their net income was, and look at how their bottom line recovered — it’s those “excluded items” that make the difference:

As Business Week notes:

PSEG 2Q profit falls 21.5 percent

It’s hard to type that headline without two or three exclamation points!!!

Here’s the report from the Star-Ledger:

PSE&G delays construction of controversial Susquehanna-Roseland power line

Published: Friday, July 30, 2010, 4:14 PM
Brian T. Murray/The Star-Ledger

Public Service Electric & Gas announced this morning a three-year delay in completing its controversial Susquehanna-Roseland transmission lines, which will cut across New Jersey’s protected, water-rich Highlands.

PSE&G broke the news in its second-quarterly earnings report, explaining that obtaining environmental approvals has taken longer than anticipated. The announcement came just days after the state Department of Environmental Protection found the company’s wetlands permit applications incomplete.

Now, the $750 million power project the company hoped to complete by 2012 will not be done until 2015.

The New Jersey Highlands Coalition and the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, two groups opposed to the project, said it may be the beginning of the end for the power line. But PSE&G said it plans to move forward, contending the power lines are needed to prevent blackouts and keep the region’s power grid reliable.

“We are disappointed by the delay, but we are going to work with the regulators. … We are still committed to constructing the line. It’s just going to be delayed,” said PSE&G spokeswoman Deann Muzikar.

Already approved by the state Board of Public Utilities and the New Jersey Highlands Council, the project involves a 500,000-volt transmission line along a 146-mile route between Pennsylvania and northern New Jersey and erecting 500-kilovolt transmission towers along a path where smaller, 230-kilovolt towers already exist. The main hurdle has been the National Park Service, which must approve a western leg of the line to run through the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail.

PSE&G split the project into two segments earlier this year, hoping to at least begin construction this summer on an eastern leg between Hopatcong in Sussex County and Roseland in Essex County. But that strategy caused trouble for its wetlands permit reviews by the DEP, which noted the BPU had approved the project in one piece, not in a bifurcated process.

Additionally, the National Park Service has stood firm on its plan to delay action until 2012, as it holds public hearings and considered alternative routes for the line. Three hearings are scheduled for Aug. 17 through Aug. 19 in Pennsylvania and Sussex County.

Environmental groups, contending the project will ruin sensitive land and promote polluting, coal-generated electrical plants in the west, applauded the park service for its careful approach.

“PSE&G has been playing a high-stakes game of chicken with the public and regulators, whom they are now blaming for their not getting their permits on a fast track. This doesn’t surprise us, considering the vast environmental and scenic damage that will be imposed on the Highlands for this risky, ill-conceived, and expensive project,” said Julia Somers of the Highlands Coalition.

YEAAAAAAAA!  The East Coast Governors are mad as hell and letting the Senate know just what they think of this Midwest plan to build billions and billions of dollars of transmission from here to the East Coast and make them pay for it, oh yes, it’s about time the Midwest schemers start listening.

The Des Moines Register is paying attention — why not Minnesota papers?

Eastern governors protest Midwest wind transmission line

And here’s the letter itself, pretty much the same spirit as the last one, although I don’t see the directly stated link to coal in this one:

East Coast Governors’ Letter 7/10/2010

Here’s  a pithy snippet:

The build-out of the national transmission corridor implicit in S. 1462 is estimated to cost at least $160 billion, the majority of which would be paid for by East Coast states, costing our ratepayers hundreds of dollars per year. In its current form, this legislation would harm regional efforts to promote local renewable energy generation, require our ratepayers to bear an unfair economic burden, unnecessarily usurp states’ current authority on resource planning and transmission line certification and siting, and hamper efforts to create clean energy jobs in our states.

This comes not too far on the heels of some promotional announcements about those transmission plans, the “not so” SMARTransmission study — I though I’d posted this before, but don’t see it, so here it is:

SMARTransmission Phase I Study

How’s this for a vision/nightmare — it’s one of their chosen three:

(Just looking for an excuse to trot out that pole-dancing bear!)

BEAR ALERT!!! Couldn’t happen to a more deserving company — Google Alert just sent me notice that one of my “favorite” companies is Zack’s “Bear of the Day!”  Why?  Well, they specifically mention that MAPP transmission project that just doesn’t seem to be needed:

Bear Of The Day: Pepco Holdings, Inc. (POM)

By Zacks Investment Research on June 30, 2010 |

Pepco’s (POM: 15.68 -0.11 -0.70%) $1.2 billion Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway (MAPP) transmission project could be delayed due to slower-than-expected load growth. The PJM Interconnection is expected to update the Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP) in June 2010 and a 1-2 year delay in the project is likely.

Pepco Holdings current trailing 12-month earnings multiple is 17.5, compared to the 21.0 average for the peer group and 18.7 for the S&P 500. Over the last five years, the company s shares have traded in a range of 7.4x to 22.6x trailing 12-month earnings. The trailing 12-month EV/EBITDA multiple is slightly above the industry average.

Check out their individual reports for other utilities and industries.  Let’s hear it for the capital market crash — ain’t the depression grand?!?!?!

How bad is it?  First the Indian River to Salem leg is cancelled, then the whole thing is suspended… and here we sit… waiting… and we all know that PJM demand is down the toilet.

Click here for the last RTEP Mid-Atlantic subcommittee presentation — see if you can download it!

CLICK HERE FOR LATEST TEAC PRESENTATION

And they opened an office and now they announce:

MAPP Office Hours Change

The MAPP Office, located at 828 Airpax Road, Suite B700, Cambridge, Md., has adjusted their hours to coincide with the present patronage of the office.  The new hours will be Mondays from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., Wednesdays from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. and Fridays from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.  Evening hours are available upon request by calling 410-221-6207.

Meanwhile, we wait for the RTEP that just won’t come out.  How delayed can it get?  I guess all that backwards engineering to demonstrate need takes a while, eh?

Xcel Energy, or Northern States Power, whichever, has filed its brief in the Routing docket for the Hiawatha Transmission Project.

Xcel/NSP Post-Hearing Brief

Xcel/NSP Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions

Also filed is Notice that the transcripts are now available at local libraries, a big help because the cost is prohibitive, they’re not free here as they are in WI or available via FOIA as they are in New Jersey (called OPRA there):

Notice – Transcripts are in the libraries

Which states:

I write to advise that the transcripts for the evidentiary hearings held in the Hiawatha Transmission Project routing proceeding on April 12 – 21 and April 26 – 30, 2010, have been placed in the following libraries: East Lake Library, Hosmer Library, Franklin Library, Central Library, and Roosevelt Library. We have also provided an extra copy to the Central Library with a request that it forward it to the Nokomis Branch once renovations are complete. The transmittal documents are enclosed.

So those of you writing briefs now know where to go!!!!

What a name…

There’s a Bonneville Power Authority transmission project, well, there’s more than one, but take a look at this one:

This is a project proposed by Bonneville Power Authority, which is a federal agency — that makes it different than a “public service corporation” applying for a project, the regulation of their transmission.

Here’s the BPA’s I-5 Corridor Reinforcement Project page.

And they have a “need” page explaining why it’s needed:

BPA’s I-5 Corridor “Need” page

And of course this is where they start to lose me:

Over the years, as power production and electrical use have grown, the transmission system in this area has become increasingly congested and has moved closer to reaching its capacity. In addition, existing firm transmission service requests and new firm transmission service requests received through BPA’s 2008 Network Open Season process further increases the likelihood that the system will soon reach or exceed its capacity. Network Open Season is a yearly process that allows utilities, power generators, and power marketers to make long-term transmission service requests on BPA’s transmission system. If an additional line is not built, continued congestion could raise serious reliability concerns and, possibly, could lead to power interruptions.

The proposed I-5 Corridor Reinforcement Project would help respond to these existing and new requests for transmission service, help accommodate load growth and address reliability concerns.

Where are links to the studies documenting reliability concerns?  Where is the documentation of load growth?  Where is the list of existing and new requests for transmission service?  Let’s see…

Here’s a June 2, 2010 presentation with a few hints (the pdf file says April, so I’ll label it that):

Presentation I-5 April 2010

This presentation notes that 15% of the power is sold elsewhere, and it notes that some of the power used in the area comes from elsewhere… but look at the map above and look for the word “Dam” and you’ll see there’s a lot of local generation going on.  “Network Open Season” sounds like utilities lining up to identify the landowners who are the targets.  Just because someone wants transmission service does not mean that it is reasonable, feasible or prudent to provide it, particularly if the capital costs of that transmission, reactive power and line loss cost is not factored in to the price used in “economic dispatch.”

Here are some other powerpoints

WECC Steering Team Presentation- Technical Analysis April 2007

WECC Final TAC Report

Once again, this is just a small part of a much larger plan — I guess we’ll have to do some digging to get at that info…

Once more with feeling…

Where are links to the studies documenting reliability concerns?  Where is the documentation of load growth?  Where is the list of existing and new requests for transmission service?