Chisago Transmission Line Comments in thus far
June 2nd, 2009
It’s all about this short section of the Chisago Transmission Project. This is a cropped portion of a map in the DoC’s Environmental Assessment, Map 4 to be precise.
To look at the entire docket, go to:
then to “eDockets” and search for 06-1677
A little light reading:
And the Comment period ends TODAY! ENDED! It’s history… Some Comments received — in alpha order:
My big question, which OAH couldn’t answer, was whether THE Agreement was filed in that OAH docket way back in 2000, was it filed in the EQB docket, filed in any docket???
Mid-Atlantic’s MAPP line cut short
May 20th, 2009
PJM, Delmarva Power, PEPCO, PHI, whatever, admit that demand is down and that the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway, the transmission line through Maryland and Delaware to New Jersey, should be delayed
The Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway, or MAPP, is part of PJM’s “Project Mountaineer,” a web of lines expressly designed to move coal generation from the Amos plant in West Virginia and gather other coal and nuclear generation and send it in a northeasterly direction:
See the MAPP line there in the NE section of Project Mountaineer line 4?
PJM has recommended delay of the inservice date for a portion of the MAPP line by a year, the portion from Indian River to Salem nuclear plant. What remains, however, is a problem, because electrically, it makes no sense to build a 500kV radial line to nowhere. If part of the line should be delayed, the ENTIRE line should be delayed.
Here’s the corporate Press Release and two “articles” which should be compared!
Press Release from Delmarva site
MAPP: Controversial High Voltage Electric Transmission Line Delayed for One Year
PJM Reinforces MAPP Need: Adds Year to Schedule (states “contributed by Delmarva Power”)
This demonstration of lack of need is something that should be raised in the Delmarva Power IRP docket, that demand is down so significantly that PJM thinks infrastructure construction should be delayed. And yes, PJM demand is way, way down.
So, since demand is so far down, this is a good time to let the PSC know, in the Delmarva Power IRP docket, that we know that demand is down, so far down that they can’t cover anymore and they have to postpone some of their infrastructure construction. The Hearing Officer is taking public comments on the Delmarva Power IRP until some time in July, I think the 25th.
Send IRP Public Comments to the Hearing Eximaner Ruth Price:
What’s an IRP Comment? The Integrated Resource Planning process is supposed to be the way a utility plans ahead to cover their demand, and it’s essentially the intersection of energy policy and those #(%&*)#*( utilities. This is the arena where it’s determined whether they should meet their demand through conservation (the cheapest and environmentally the smallest footprint), efficiency steps like load shifting and SmartGrid, offshore wind paired with natural gas for backup, and whether external costs of various generation options are taken into account. SOOOOO, does that give you an idea of what’s up?
See Delmarva Power’s IRP docket at the PSC, scroll down beyond that rulemaking on the top:
And note this sly trick — they couldn’t get their IRP right from last cycle and were told by PSC staff to take it home and try again, and the last revision of that last IRP is the one they submitted:
And they said in their accompanying letter that this one should be for THIS cycle! AAAAAAARGH!
So, it’s time to review this joke of an IRP, take a look at PJM load forecasting, look at PJM and PEPCO SEC filings like their 2008 10-K and 2009 1st Quarter 10-Q:
Dig up some good conservation reports and sent them in as examples of what can be done. Let them know that with PJM demand down, we expect some changes, that this is a good opportunity to take a sustainable fork in the road, when demand is down we can make conscious choices.
Once more with feeling, check out the Delmarva Power IRP and send comments to ruth.price@state.de.us.
PSE&G Discovery – Susquehanna-Roseland line
May 17th, 2009
It’s been a busy couple of weeks, with Discovery to and fro with PSE&G. Here’s the results:
This is their response to the BPU Discovery. Although Ken Sheehan at BPU had said we could proceed with Discovery before we were parties, we’d sent the blanket request for others’ requests to avoid duplication and find out where we were at, but they ignored it, and even BPU would not forward their requests… so we sat in the dark until after our intervention was formally granted. I asked again, and lo and behold, that same day, BPU turned over their requests and PSE&G turned over their respones to BPU Discovery. Many of the responses aren’t, so I imagine there’ll be some wrangling about that.
Here’s what we’ve sent to them so far:
The Discovery deadline for the Direct Testimony has been extended to June 5th.
Are we having fun yet?
Susquehanna-Roseland Xmsn Interventions OK’d
April 29th, 2009
Day before yesterday, New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilities met to make determinations on the Motions for Intervention of a large number of parties. Stop the Lines, of course being one! They’d objected to our Intervention:
… but had no objection to my Pro Hac Vice… go figure. And the feeling I had from the BPU is that they were honestly encouraging interventions. SO, what happened?
State: 17 groups may intervene in PSE&G’s power line proposal
By Colleen O’Dea • Daily Record • April 27, 2009All 17 groups that sought to be part of the hearing process on Public Service Electric and Gas Company’s proposed transmission line project may do so, the state Board of Public Utilities decided today.
Meeting in Newark, the board also directed PSE&G to meet with the intervening parties – several municipalities, environmental organizations and citizens groups – to negotiate an agreement on the establishment of an escrow account from which the groups could pay for expert witnesses.
“Super,” is how Dave Slaperud of the 300-member Stop the Lines, one of six groups the utility had sought to bar from intervening in its application to add 500 kilovolt lines along a 46-mile transmission corridor from Pennsylvania through Morris County to Roseland, described the BPU’s decision.
“We would have been really surprised if we had been denied intervener status,” said Slaperud. “There are so many of us living along the line who are affected and not all the municipalities are getting involved in the process.”
Among the government bodies that are involved are East Hanover, Montville, Parsippany and Byram townships and the Montville Board of Education. Interveners are allowed to request discovery documents, cross examine witnesses and present their own expert testimony.
And more:
Groups cleared to speak at powerline hearings
ANOTHER TRANSMISSION PLAN FROM HELL…
April 3rd, 2009
From the folks who brought you CapX 2020, today we get even more…
Here’s a link over to my other site — I’ll post a map and more tomorrow, but for now, go over to www.nocapx2020.info
CLICK HERE: ALL ABOUT THE NEW TRANSMISSION PLAN FROM HELL
How dare they… and on the eve of the CapX 2020 Certificate of Need oral argument and deliberation, whatever are they thinking… I do not understand