Susquehanna-Roseland update – lawsuit v. NPS !!!!
October 15th, 2012
The Delaware Water Gap is one of the few National Park Service Wild and Scenic Rivers, and it’s in a struggle to stay that way. I represented Stop the Lines before the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities administrative proceeding, which ended with a permit issued to PSEG. Boooo-hisssss.
TODAY, a lawsuit was filed by National Parks Conservation Assoc., Appalachian Mountain Club, Appalachian Trail Conservancy, Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, New Jersey Highlands Coalition, New York-New Jersey Trail Conference, Rock the Earth, Sierra Club, Stop the Lines versus Ken Salazar as Secretary of the Interior and head of National Park Service, and Dennis Reidenbach as Northeast Regional Director of National Park Service:
Complaint – National Parks Conservation Assoc., et al. v. Salazar & Reidenbach
GOOD! Serves them right, after caving to Obama’s transmission fast-tracking!
So what’s the scoop? PSEG and PPL have targeted the Delaware Water Gap for a crossing of its Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line. Here’s the NATIONAL PARK SERVICE PAGE for the project.
Here’s the full map:
Which is a small part of the bigger picture, part of line #1 on this Project Mountaineer, the transmission for coal scenario hatched at a top secret FERC meeting in 2005:
The alternatives evaluated by the National Park Service’s Delaware Water Gap in their EIS looks like this (click on map for larger version):
Here’s the link to the National Park Service’s Final EIS. Inexplicably, National Park Service went from identifying the “no action alternative” as the Environmentally Preferred Alternative, to a (rolling over) “STICK IT HERE!” Oh, and a payoff of $30-40 million. And then there’s “pre-approval” of the project by NPS…
Stay tuned!
NPS pressured about Susquehanna-Roseland EIS
July 21st, 2011
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:
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-TimesAnd the New Jersey Sierra Club wants Dent, R-Lehigh Valley, to back off.
If it passes through the House, it would be referred to the Senate.
Park Service releases EIS Scoping Report
April 29th, 2010
Imagine 190 foot transmission towers through the Delaware Water Gap, between Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
That’s what’s proposed by PSE&G for its Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line. This quad/tri bundled 500kV line is HUGE, ugly beyond belief, and it’s just so big that I can hardly comprehend, there’s nothing that large that I’ve found. Others like it are being cancelled by PJM due to lack of demand, and this one should be too…
From the Pocono Record:
Anyway, the National Park Service is doing an Environmental Impact Statement, and leading up to that is “scoping,” which, as Grant Stevenson noted yesterday at the Task Force meeting, is THE most misunderstood term. I agree. It just zooms over people’s heads, and comments end up being of the “I hate this project because___” and nothing that relates to what the scope of the environmental review should be. Utter waste of time, and something to be mindful of with the CapX 2020 transmission scoping meetings coming up.
SCOPE: Range, area of coverage, breadth
So “scoping” in this sense is the range, area of coverage, and breadth of environmental review.
We had comments on the scope a few months ago, and there were something like 6,500 comments. Yes, that’s right, SIX THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED! At the meetings I went to, it was standing room only and the comments were notably on point, they were profound examples of those rare uplifting meetings. Facilitation of the meetings was so good it felt like they really were interested in what we had to say. It was all taken down by a court reporter. THAT level of attention and appreciation is SO rare… and dig this … afterwards I RECEIVED A THANK YOU NOTE FOR PARTICIPATING. That is a first, I’ve never gotten a thank you note from an agency for showing up and speaking out. I’m thinking of framing it (after sending it to MN’s Dept. of Commerce).
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE – SUSQUEHANNA-ROSELAND 500kV TRANSMISSION LINE PAGE
Here’s their report:
The next step?
We’ll keep you posted.
National Park Service extends Comment period
March 5th, 2010
National Park Service has extended the deadline for EIS Scoping Comments on the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission project. WHEW! Now we have until March 12 to send our comments in!
Get your clues on Comments from what they do and do not include:
It’s in the Pocono Times:
From the NPS blog:
Posted March 5th, 2010 by Kurt Repanshek
High public interest has prompted the superintendents of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, and the Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River and National Recreation Water Trail to extend by a week the public comment period on a proposal to run a transmission line across the areas.
The comment period was scheduled to end today, but has been extended through March 12.
There are numerous ways for the public to provide comments on the public scoping phase of the planning process, including leaving a message on the Park Planning Information Telephone Line (570-426-2491), submitting comments online through a link on the National Park Service Planning, Environment and Public Comment site, http://parkplanning.nps.gov (select Appalachian NST or Delaware Water Gap NRA), or by mailing comments to:
Detailed information about the need for the EIS and the project timeline
can be found on the National Park Service Planning, Environment and Public
Comment site: http://parkplanning.nps.gov.
Susquehanna-Roseland hearing yesterday!
March 21st, 2009
PPL gets earful at Saw Creek public hearing
Nearly 300 come out for Bushkill power line hearing
Bushkill power line hearings draw hundreds
Let’s take a look at their SEC filings!
Some utility toady on commenting on one of the articles above suggested I buy PPL stock… right… good idea…