ALJ: Underground Hiawatha Project
October 9th, 2010
Underground Xcel’s Hiawatha Project transmission. That’s BIG, it’s good news, except for one thing — “Who pays?” is still a question:
ALJ Heydinger’s Recommendation for Xcel’s Hiawatha Transmission Project
Problem is, cost allocation isn’t dealt with specifically, only explained, so no recommendation regarding that.
If the PUC went ahead, would it be spread across the Metro area, the full Xcel rate base, or???
For the SE Metro, and for the Chisago Transmission Project, if they cities would have agreed to shoulder the cost, undergrounding was no problem. But that’s not feasible for a city to pay. So now what? Will the PUC actually order undergrounding, with a broad rate base recovery?
MAPP delayed again… of course!
October 7th, 2010
MAPP then… and MAPP now:
Good news on the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway front — another continuance granted!
This Order gives the parties until November 30, 2010 to report in on whether a Status Conference is necessary.
Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway is a 500kV transmission line proposed for Maryland and Delaware (the New Jersey part has gone the way of the brontosaurus. Apparently there’s a delay in the Application (well of course, delay’s appropriate and expected when something isn’t needed!). A little birdie told me that Pepco Holdings (PHI) will probably file their updated Application for the Maryland CPCN in November, if PJM gets their act together. The part in Maryland is a revised southern Maryland segment, the undergrounded Bay crossing and the eastern shore to the Delaware state line.
A significant part of this line will be undergrounded.
CRVC’s hearing on Development Agreement suit
October 7th, 2010
(really, that’s their “site plan” — how informative!!)
It’s in the news, Concerned River Valley Citizens’ suit against LS Power, Lent Township and Chisago County had a hearing last week. Short version:
Judge Hoffman said he wanted to be armed with sufficient information to make a decision. He asked for just one thing – a written transcript of the legislative discussion that preceded the adoption of the legislation regarding the tax exemption in 2009, specifically subdivision 92 pertaining to the obtaining of the development agreement.
He asked the attorneys to write a letter to the court when it is provided and then he will make his decision.
The judge believed this information is important and he can’t be obligated to make a decision until he knows what the legislation said about approval of a development agreement “before” the start of construction.
Most committee meetings now are available online, and the legislative library provides tapes. One problem is that the legislative intent is rarely conveyed in the committee meetings, and all the behind the scenes doings aren’t going to see the light of day.
The statutory section at issue – Minn. Stat. 272.02, Subd. 92.
Here’s the Summons and Complaint from last June:
For more info, go to www.stopsunriseriverplant.com
From ECM Post Review:
Judge asks for one thing in power plant civil case