References
The page documents efforts to build the Talega-Escondido/Valley-Serrano high-voltage transmission line before or without completing the LEAPS project.
Action you can take to help stop LEAPS
Why LEAPS is not economically viable
What credible persons and agencies say
Lies, Inaccuracies, and Misleading Statements
References, documents and links
Transmission lines only
12/17/08: CPUC Decision approves Sunrise Powerlink.
State commission approves Sunrise Powerlink project
On Thursday 12/18 the CPUC voted to approve SDG&E's application for construction of the Sunrise Powerlink transmission line. They voted on what is known as the Peevee Alternate Decision. As many of you may know Peevee is the president of the commission recently appointed to a second term by our Governor. Despite the fact that the primary decision, written by the administrative law judge in the proceeding, denied the project; Peevee's action made approval almost a foregone conclusion. The decision which was approved can be found at:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/AGENDA_DECISION/95357.htm
The CPUC rules allow for what is known as a rehearing, with the possibility of oral arguments before the entire commission. There is a 30 day window to file a motion for rehearingSee Maps of Transmission Line.
9/3/08: CPUC determines the Proponents Environmental Assessment for the transmission lines inadequate. (CPUC comments, PDF 50kb)
7/10/08: Southern California Edison's Response to Nevada Hydro's Proponents Environmental Assessment (SCE Protest, PDF 259kB)
6/16/08: Jacki Ayer's Brief before the California Public Utlities Commission (pdf, 270kB). Jacki demonstrates that there is no justification for CPUC to determine that the “LEAPS Transmission Only” project is even an alternative to the Sunrise powerlink transmission line, let alone the “environmentally preferred” wires alternative.
3/14/08: CPUC rules that Nevada Hydros application to construct the transmission lines is incomplete. Below are two protests filed with CPUC and a ruling by an administrative law judge:
- Protest PEA by J. Ayer, 9 Oct. 07 (PDF)
- Response to PEA by California Unions for Reliable Energy (CURE) to PEA,7 Mar. 08 (PDF)
- CPUC Ruling, 10 Mar. 08 (PDF)
12/13/07: Doug Pinnow has finally obtained a copy of the Proponents Environmental Assessment for LEAPS and the Talega/Escondido-Valley/Serrano transmission line submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission.
Download a copy of the except describing the transmission lines only option(PDF).
CPUC page regarding this application (highly recommended; you can read protests from individuals, agencies, and non-governmental organizations)
Comment from Doug Pinnow and how to get a copy of the whole report:
Yesterday, I received a CD from Nevada Hydro with a pdf that contained their Proponent's Environmental Assessment (PEA) for the TE/VS transmission line. The document is quite large, over 1000 pages (197 MB). It's in the format of a draft EIR for the entire LEAPS Project. However, it also addresses the possibility of doing only the power lines on pages 9-55 and 9-56. There it is stated:
... the expectation that the hydropower project would be developed soon or immediately following the construction of the transmission project provides supportable substantiation for the District's involvement. If the District should elect not to pursue this option or should the District be precluded from serving in the role of project proponent for a transmisssion-only project based on statutorry constraints, TNHC would continue to independently develop this alternative such that, should the District election not to approve or conditionally approve the TE/VS Interconnection project, TNHC would seek its subsequent approval through the CPUC.
This is the first time I've seen Nevada Hydro's strategy in print! Due to the enormous size of the PEA, I have only reproduced and attached four pages above. They are the cover page, Introduction, and pages 9-56 and 9-56. If you'd like to receive a copy of the entire PEA, please send e-mail to me your postal mailing address and I'll send you a CD that contains the complete PEA.
Regards, Doug Pinnow
(NOTE: You'll need to retype this email into your email program)
Maps
Fall 2007 Items of Interest
Nevada Hydro Comments on Sunrise Powerlink Transmission Project (pdf, 1.2mB)
- Nevada Hydro files protest against the Sunrise Powerlink that is being proposed by SDG&E. There are several significant observations to be made from this document:
- Nevada Hydro considers their proposed TE/VS Power Line through the Cleveland National Forest to be a viable and preferred alternative to the Sunrise Powerlink.
- Nevada Hydro has aggressively attacked SDG&E on their position that it would cost $1.8 billion extra to make the TE/VS Power Line viable for providing power to San Diego.
- Nevada Hydro takes the (strange) position that the TE/VS Power Line will be built before the Sunrise Powerlink because (so far) no one has attacked their stated 2009 completion date.
- I didn't see any mention of EVMWD in Nevada Hydro's entire brief. Nevada Hydro is clearly going after building the TE/VS Power Line on their own. They are also clearly trying to separate the TE/VS power line form the LEAPS Project.
- I'm confident that SDG&E will make a strong response and the debate will continue. However, the attached document is significant because it establishes Nevada Hydro's clear intention to push the TE/VS Power Line to the maximum limit of their ability and specifically as an alternative to the Sunrise Powerlink.
Doug Pinnow, 11/29
Protest by California Public Utilities Commission, Division of Ratepayers Advocates (PDF)
This document is a protest to Nevada Hydro's application to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for the TE/VS Power Line that will go through the Cleveland National Forest. This protest is quite important because it comes from the Division of Ratepayers Advocates (DRA). The DRA is actually a group within the CPUC that is mandated by law to represent and advocate on behalf of public utility customers. The DRA states that Nevada Hydro's application is inadequate. They say that Nevada Hydro "should clearly demonstrate that [the] TE/VS [Power Line] provides added reliability, and is in the best interest of California's ratepayers, compared to other reasonable alternatives. This will be a tall order for Nevada Hydro to fill. I find all this to be very encouraging that the CPUC won't simply rubber stamp the TE/VS Power Line application."
Protest filed by Jacki Ayer (PDF)
Riverside County opposes splitting LEAPS and the transmission lines into two projects: County weighs in with concerns on power line, Californian Nov 7, 2007 and County supervisor demands review of power line, Californian Nov 6, 2007.
September, EVMWD's law firm, Best Best & Krieger, sent a draft Memo of Understanding (MOU) to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
October 9th, Nevada Hydro made an application (PDF 2.4mb) directly to the CPUC for a Certificate to build the LEAPS high-voltage power line.
Protests must be filed within 30 days of the CPUC's Notice of Application for a Certificate that is dated October 17, 2007.
CPUC rejects EVMWD's involvement in Talega-Escodido/Valley-Serrano transmission line.
Riverside County opposes splitting LEAPS and the transmission lines into two projects:
County weighs in with concerns on power line, Californian Nov 7, 2007
County supervisor demands review of power line, Californian Nov 6, 2007
Former FERC commissioner testifies that FERC does not have the authority to authorize the LEAPS transmission line (see pdf)
Request for information from Nevada Hydro regarding transmission line (data request pdf)
