April 16, 2014 · 3:09 pm

MP’s routing application is filed

RoutePermitCoverYes, here it is, it’s been filed, and it’s massive, so it’ll take a while to download and post — apologies for not doing it yesterday, but it was tax day after all, something that for those of us self-employed folks is a royal pain, or should I say a royal payin’ perhaps!  So today, getting this application posted is the task.

To check it out, go to the PUC’s “Search eDockets” page, and go to the listings for Docket “14-21” — it’s easy, at the red link above, click there, and where it says “Docket Number” at the box that says “SELECT” put in “14” and then on the box to the right of that, put in “21” and hit “SEARCH” just above and it’ll appear on your screen.

OK, it’s tea time, and then I’ll download and then upload over a cup of Earl Grey — a BIG cup!

Here’s the scoop – about 1/3 of the filings are too large to upload, so I’m cutting and pasting from their site.  If you’re interested in this, download it, because those links could change, and in time, they could be “disappeared,” which I’ve seen often over the years.  So download, and if you’re wanting a hard copy or CD of the application, call them or email and request it!

The “Presidential Permit” is the one I’m most interested in, and I’ll look into how that works and put up a post on it soon.  They’re not all downloading, maybe they’re just putting it up now.  So, don’t be surprised if some of those links don’t work.  Here ya’ go:

Route Permit Application

Leave a Comment

Filed under PUC Filings, Routing Docket

April 15, 2014 · 5:23 pm

Open houses beginning in Canada for GNTL

As reported in the Winnipeg Free Press, a series of open houses has begun this week, TODAY, and continue through the first week of May in Canada regarding the Canadian part of the “Great Northern Transmission Line.”

Hydro hosts open houses on U.S. transmission line

04/9/2014

Manitoba Hydro wants public feedback as it puts the final touches on its proposed transmission line to the United States.

The line is to run from Rosser (https://www.hydro.mb.ca/projects/mb_mn_transmission/description.shtml) north-west of Winnipeg south to the Minnesota border where it will hook up with a second line to Duluth.

Under a proposal now being studied by the Public Utilities Board, Manitoba Hydro will own 49 per cent of the U.S. side of the 500 KV transmission line, with Minnesota Power owning the rest.

The PUB has heard that Hydro’s stake in the line was needed so that it would be upgraded, at Hydro’s request, from the originally-proposed 230 kilovolts to 500. The larger line (http://www.greatnortherntransmissionline.com/) would allow Hydro to ship more power into the Wisconsin market and import more power to Manitoba from U.S. utilities when needed.

Hydro says it also wants input from First Nations, the Manitoba Metis Federation, local municipalities, government departments, local landowners and the public during the final route selection and environmental assessment process.

Open houses will be held from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Ste. Anne — Tuesday, April 15, Seine River Banquet Centre, 80A Arena Road.
Richer — Wednesday, April 16, Richer Young at Heart Community Club, Dawson Road at Highway 302.
Vita — Tuesday, April 22, Vita Community Hall, 209 Main Street North.
Piney — Wednesday, April 23, Piney Community Centre, Highway No. 89 (Main Street).
La Broquerie — Thursday, April 24, La Broquerie Arena, 35 Normandeau Bay.
Marchand — Wednesday, April 30, Marchand Community Club, Dobson Avenue.
Dugald — Tuesday, April 29, Dugald Community Club, 554 Holland Street.
Lorette –Tuesday, May 6, Lorette Community Complex ,1420 Dawson Road.
Headingley — Wednesday, May 7, Headingley Community Centre, 5353 Portage Avenue.
Winnipeg –Thursday, May 8, Holiday Inn Winnipeg South, 1330 Pembina Highway.

Hydro has also posted an online survey (http://sm.upaknee.com/surveys/101378/manitoba-minnesota-transmission-project-round-2/) on its website for the project.

 

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Canada permitting, Hearings, Meetings

· 4:45 pm

MP to file GNTL Routing Application TODAY!

turkeyvulture

A little birdie told me that Minnesota Power will be filing the Great Northern Transmission Line routing application and the DOE Presidential Permit Application sometime today.  TODAY!

Heads up!

Duck and Cover!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Routing Docket

April 14, 2014 · 5:16 pm

MP serves responses to Commerce Info Requests

Moving along little by little, Commerce has sent in Information Requests and Minnesota Power is answering them:

DoC IR 1

DOC_IR_002 – FINAL

DOC_IR_003 – FINAL

20121102 Northern Area Study Presentation

20121105 MH Wind Synergy Study TRG Presentation_Updated

More to follow as they send them.

And an update, here are those that we’d filed, and the MP responses:

RRANT_IR_001 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_002 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_003 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_004 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_005 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_006 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_007 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_008 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_009 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_010 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_011 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_012 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_013 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_014 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_015 – FINAL

Leave a Comment

Filed under Information Requests

March 14, 2014 · 10:20 pm

A view from above — Canada that is…

Canada_flag_halifax_9_-04

In the Brandon Sun:

Power line to U.S. ‘ill-advised’ for Manitoban rate-payers: Pallister

By: Staff Writer

Thursday, Mar. 13, 2014 at 2:08 PM

Opposition Leader Brian Pallister charged today the NDP is recklessly “Americanizing” Manitoba Hydro at the expense of Manitobans under its plan to build two new dams and a new transmission line to the United States.

“The fact is what we’re guaranteed with here under the NDP’s agenda is a power-aid program,” he said. “We get to do all the sweating up here and they get the juice down there.”

Pallister said an example of that is that the Crown utility wants approval to build and co-own a proposed transmission line that will run from Winnipeg to Duluth, MN. Under a proposal now being studied by the Public Utilities Board, Manitoba Hydro will own 49 per cent of the 500 KV transmission line with Minnesota Power owning the rest.

The PUB has heard that Hydro’s stake in the line was needed so that it would be upgraded, at Hydro’s request, from the originally-proposed 230 kilovolts to 500. The larger line would allow Hydro to ship more power into the Wisconsin market and import more power to Manitoba from U.S. utilities when needed.

Hydro’s involvement in the line has been described at the hearing as being “an owner of last resort” in order to see it upgraded.

“Who says Manitoba Hydro had to get it done?” Pallister said. “This government, obviously, is driving Manitoba Hydro’s agenda and pushing Manitoba Hydro to make deal that may well be ill-advised for Manitoba ratepayers.”

The PUB has heard this week that under a confidential deal with Minnesota Power to build the transmission line, Manitoba Hydro — at this stage — will be responsible for 66 per cent of the line’s construction and maintenance. That’s because Minnesota Power does not need the full capacity of the line so it only wants to pay for the portion it will use.

“So with regard to the question of who will pay, Minnesota Power intends to rate-base the cost of their 250-megawatt share of the large (750 MW) interconnection,” Hydro’s division manager of power sales, David Cormie, told the PUB on Monday. “That means their customers, through their rate-recovery mechanisms with their customers, will recover the cost of their investment.

“That leaves Manitoba Hydro with the obligation to pay for the balance of 66 per cent, including the cost of providing the transmission services to Wisconsin Public Service. However, as we intend to be an owner only of last resort, we are making provisions in these discussions on the business relationship so that a third party can step in and participate.”

Cormie also said despite Hydro’s 66 per cent involvement in the 850-kilometre line, it’s still a benefit to the utility because it provides it with an electricity pipeline into the American Midwest.

“Under the contracts dependent on the line, Manitoba Hydro’s energy gets shipped first,” he told the PUB. “Whether it’s dependable or surplus fixed-priced energy or additional energy that Manitoba Hydro intends for the spot market, we own the transmission rights in Canada. They may own the transmission rights on the U.S. side associated with their ownership position, but it’s always Manitoba Hydro’s energy that will flow on that — on — under those firm rights.”

He also said it makes sense to build a larger-capacity transmission line now, instead of a smaller one, because having to add another line to Minnesota in later years will be more expensive and more scrutinized by regulators.

Pallister asked if American investors didn’t want to get involved in the line in its earlier stages, why they would get involved after it’s built.

“The fact is Manitoba Hydro has entered into a commitment that obligates Manitoba Hydro ratepayers to subsidize U.S. purchasers of hydro,” he said.

Pallister also questioned Hydro’s expectations, and the government’s, that by building the proposed Keeyask and Conawapa generating stations the province will reap billions selling power to Americans as U.S. utilities close old, carbon-belching coal plants and add hydro power as part of state-mandated plans to use more renewable energy.

He said experts to testify at the ongoing PUB hearing will say Hydro’s expectations are overblown.

The PUB is examining whether there are alternatives to building the $6.5-billion Keeyask and $10.7-billion Conawapa generating stations, and if the line to Duluth is needed.

It’s to file its report to government June 20.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Canada permitting, Uncategorized

March 12, 2014 · 10:24 pm

Scoping Comments due Friday @ 4:30 p.m.

scope

No, not that kind of scoping, for scoping of the Environmental Report, or is it THIS Environmental Report… whichever, it’s this kind of scoping:

Scope involves getting information required to start a project, and the features the product would have that would meet its stakeholders requirements.

In this case, it’s Environmental Report, or Environmental Report, and not Environmental Impact Statement (that is an issue that should be raised, see below, and the rules pertaining to an EIS in a Certificate of Need proceeding), and they’re looking for what all specifically should be included in this “Environmental Report.”

RRANT Scoping Comment

There’s a “Draft” scoping decision that has the rough outline:

DRAFT ER Scoping document

What to submit for comments?  Well, it’s got to be specific!  They have general categories, and if you have something specific for consideration within these categories, send it in!  And if there is an environmental consideration NOT addressed here, send it in!

Comments are due by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, March 14, 2014.

Send to bill.storm@state.mn.us

Some ideas:

  • Cumulative impacts must be addressed.  I’ve heard of an instance where someone was hit with a pipeline and a transmission line recently, and now Minnesota Power is proposing getting hit AGAIN for the GNTL!  “You’ll get used to it?”  Nooooo, that’s not within the realm of rational response or probable outcomes.  How are the impacts of multiple projects balanced with Minnesota’s policy of “non-proliferation,” where transmission is to be run on “pre-existing” corridors?  Where transmission is routed on greenfield, and then followed by other infrastructure, over and over and over… how is this taken into account?
  • The full range of potential electric and magnetic fields must be addressed, not just a minimal number that’s a small percentage of potential capacity (as is usually done by Commerce’s EIS/ER — NOT acceptable).
  • Alternatives will be analyzed — but what alternatives — alternatives to what?  This is a project “needed” to transmit a nominal amount of electricity under a PPA between Minnesota Power and Manitoba Hydro, and the rest is for export.  So given that “need” claim, what alternatives are there?  This is transmission for profit.  Is the search on for another revenue stream for them?  Are there alternatives to satisfy this “want” that pretends to be a need?  How will the state handle this?
  • Because of the magnitude of this line, so many miles long and such high capacity, an Environmental Impact Statement should be completed, not just this Environmental Report (p.s., there’s no provision under MEPA, 116D, for “Environmental Report” as an environmental document).

And if you’re interested in the Canadian “Independent Expert” report on environmental considerations, and remember, this is for the WHOLE Canadian project:

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Certificate of Need, Environmental Review, PUC Filings

March 6, 2014 · 10:56 pm

Canadian NFAT Hearing has begun

canadianflag

Half of the Great Northern Transmission Project is in Canada, where the transmission line is part of the much larger “Manitoba Hydro’s proposed preferred development plan for the Keeyask and Conawapa Generating Stations, their associated domestic AC transmission facilities and a new Canada-USA transmission interconnection.“

Manitoba Public Utilities Board NFAT site for this project

Manitoba Hydro is seeking government approval for its proposed Preferred Development Plan, which requires the following commitments in June 2014:

In addition, the plan would include Conawapa G.S., 1,485 MW, with an earliest ISD of 2026, although decisions on whether to construct Conawapa and its timing are not required now and would be made over the next few years.

Intervenors: CLICK HERE for identification and information about their cases

They are going through a similar but MUCH more rigorous process, and the NFAT hearing has just begun, scheduled to extend from Monday’s beginning through May 13, 2014, with “Closing Submissions” following until May 26, and maybe longer than that.

NFAT Hearing Schedule

Also, if you go to the “HEARING“ tab, then click on Exhibit Lists, each intervenor’s exhibits are linked, from the initial Intervenor Application to everything they plan to enter during the hearing, and… like… WOW!  Lots of good info there, including:

LaCapra – Appendix 8  Transmission (MAJORLY redacted)

LaCapra – Appendix 6  Export Markets (also MAJORLY redacted)

Spend some time on the NFAT site and check out how they conduct hearings up there, what type of evidence and reports they’re entering, the length of the hearings, and check the intervenors’ work plans and the amounts the Manitoba PUB is dishing out for intervenor expenses!  Granted the subject of this Canadian hearing is much broader than “just” a transmission line, but what a difference it would make of hearings here were more like hearings there!

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Canada permitting, Uncategorized

· 8:24 pm

Responses to initial Information Requests

mailbox

Fresh from the Inbox, Minnesota Power has responded to RRANT’s initial Information Requests:

RRANT_IR_001 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_002 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_003 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_004 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_005 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_006 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_007 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_008 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_009 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_010 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_011 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_012 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_013 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_014 – FINAL

RRANT_IR_015 – FINAL

Some will seem repetitive, but I’m just going around the same thing several ways…

The most interesting to me are the links in the response to IR 4 for MISO and other studies to justify or support building the GNTL project, THANK YOU Minnesota Power FOR SENDING WORKING LINKS:

System Impact Study (SIS) reports and meeting presentations

Draft SIS Report Prior Outage & Injection Analysis              7/9/2010

Draft SIS Report – TO Option                                                     4/26/2010

Additional Impact Analysis Draft Report                                 4/20/2010

Executive Summary (Final Report)                                           7/20/2009

Final SIS Report Summer Peak analysis                                   7/20/2009

Final SIS Report Winter Peak analysis                                      7/20/2009

Final SIS Report Stability analysis                                              7/20/2009

Updated Draft Stability SIS Report analysis                            6/29/2009

Updated Draft SIS Report- Winter Peak analysis                   6/29/2009

Updated Draft SIS Report- Summer Peak analysis               6/29/2009

Draft Stability analysis                                                                 4/30/2009

Draft SIS Report- Winter Peak analysis                                   3/20/2009

Draft SIS Report- Summer Peak analysis                                 3/11/2009

Draft SIS Report                                                                             1/13/2009

Preliminary Draft SIS Report                                                    12/16/2008

LT MH Study Screening results                                                  1/21/2009

MH_TSR_Group Study_Transmission Options                    1/21/2009

Facilities Study Reports and meeting presentations

MH-MP_AC_Thermal_Sensitivity_Analysis-Eastern_Plan-Draft_Report-01-07-13.pdf

MH-MP_AC_Thermal_Sensitivity_Analysis-Western_Plan-Draft_Report-01-07-13.pdf

MH-MP TSR meeting Feb 2013                                  3/6/2013

MH-MP TSR meeting Jan 2013_EPL                          1/8/2013

MH-MP AC Thermal Sensitivity Analysis – Draft Report – 01-03-2013      1/8/2013

Dorsey – Iron Range 500 kV Project Preliminary Stability Analysis – Draft Report – 12-5-2012    1/8/2013

MH Group Study Option 1 FS                                                      6/1/2010

MH Group Study CapX – TO presentation                              11/4/2009

CapX FS proposal presentation                                                  11/4/2009

Additional Analysis Scope document                                       11/4/2009

Final FS Report (GRE)                                                                1/19/2010

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Information Requests, Need, PUC Filings, Uncategorized

February 24, 2014 · 2:51 pm

First round of Information Requests

question_marks

I’ve just served Minnesota Power first round of Information Requests from Intervenor Residents and Ratepayers Against Not-so-Great Northern Transmission (RRANT), and Applicant Minnesota Power has 8 business days to respond.  The most important one is the first one, a general request for responses to IRs that others have sent — that should be an info dump — usually Dept. of Commerce does a pretty good job asking questions that need to be asked (not that they always follow through and address the issues in the hearing!).

RRANT_IR 1_for Minnesota Power

RRANT_IRs 2-6_for Minnesota Power

RRANT_IRs 7-15_for Minnesota Power

Take a look at these to get an idea what’s going on — Information Requests are one of the joys of intervention, as a party, we’re able to file them.  IRs 2-6 are mostly getting general background info as preparation for diving in, and IRs 7-15 are cost related, how they plan to recover costs.

I try to group Information Requests in categories to help me track them.  As I go through the Application, I’m taking notes, filling it with post-its (if you, like me, MUST have a hard copy, ask for one through their Great Northern Transmission site, or call Minnesota Power), and when I get a few questions, I fire off an Information Request.

If you have particular burning questions, let me know, and I’ll see if it’s something appropriate for an Information Request!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

February 19, 2014 · 10:12 pm

Scoping Meetings Tonight & Tomorrow

InternationalFalls

This week is the last round of environmental review scoping meetings for the Great Northern Transmission Line.

And here’s the view last week the morning before the scoping meeting in International Falls after 5-6 inches of snow.  It wasn’t horrible, but coming back was a bit rough, roads were greasy and on Hwy. 53 where it’s 2 lane, I was stuck behind someone who kept hitting the binders in the middle of a curve, over and over and over, I had to back way way off so I wouldn’t have to hit the brakes too.  GRRRRRRR.  Anyway, I’d planed to go to the Grand Rapids meeting tomorrow, but we’ve got a “blizzard warning” here in Red Wing, and Duluth area looks pretty bad, and Hwy. 73 would be pretty grim between I-35 and Hwy. 2, so I think I’m opting out.  Not sure, but probably.  Double GRRRRRR!

The Scoping Meetings are:

Tonight beginning at 6 p.m.
The Sanford Center
1111 Event Center Drive NE
Bemidji, MN
 
Tomorrow beginning at 6 p.m.
Sawmill Inn
2301 S Highway 169
Grand Rapids, MN

If I don’t go, I’ll be spending the day with the Great Northern Transmission Line application (linked here), and writing a few Letters to the Editor.

The categories expected to be covered are broad, and “scoping” is letting them know what you think should be specifically included regarding these categories, or what specifically should be covered in broad categories that they forgot to list!  The more specific your comments, the better.

Comments due by 4:30 p.m. March 14, 2014

Send to:

bill.storm@state.mn.us

Here are those broad categories for the environmental report — what about these needs to be considered:

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Need
1.2 Regulatory requirements

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 General
2.2 Design
2.3 Right-of-Way Requirements and Acquisition
2.4 Construction
2.5 Operation and Maintenance
2.6 Permits

3.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED HVTL
3.1 No-build Alternative
3.2 Demand Side Management
3.3 Purchase Power
3.3.1 Long term Purchase Power
3.3.2 Short term Purchase Power
3.5 Up-grading Existing Facilities
3.6 Facilities of a Different Size
3.7 New Generation

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AFFECTS
4.1 Air Quality
4.2 Biological Resources
4.3 Culture Resources
4.4 Geology and Soils
4.5 Health and Safety
4.6 Land Use
4.7 Noise
4.8 Socioeconomics
4.9 Transportation
4.10 Visual Impacts and Aesthetics
4.11 Water Resources (surface, groundwater, wetlands)
4.12 Waste Management and Disposal

Leave a Comment

Filed under Information Requests, Meetings