Re: (task) Gaining Traction?

Tom,

Acknowledged. This article is Paul Heitmann of IEEE. We should look at what the IEEE Committees might do to weigh in on this,

Mike

> On Mar 15, 2018, at 11:10 PM, Thomas Bjurlof <thomas.bjurlof@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> Nice find!
>
> It raises the question whether the 138kV power line project between Canal and Buell/Wainscott triggers Article 7 under NYS law. If so there are intervenor funds available to oppose.
>
> As we heard earlier in the week NYISO would not have a role on this project, but the NTA argument could always be used from a common law perspective.
>
> Tom
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:00 PM, michael mcdonald <michael.d.mcdonald@mac.com <mailto:michael.d.mcdonald@mac.com>> wrote:
> NJRS NCRRS NYRS NYRNs SFLRS
>
> 4 cover
>
> electricity, renewables, distributed energy
>
>>
>>
>> Article from 3/9/18 Asbury Park Press
>>
>> JCP&L Monmouth power line zapped
>> David P. Willis
>> Asbury Park Press USA TODAY NETWORK - NEW JERSEY
>> An administrative law judge has sided with a residents group in its battle against Jersey Central Power & Light’s proposed high-voltage $111 million power line between Aberdeen and Red Bank.
>> The decision by Judge Gail Cookson comes nearly two years after JCP& L proposed to build a 10-mile transmission line alongside the North Jersey Coast Line train tracks. It would have put a 230-kilovolt line in close proximity to hundreds of homes in Middletown, Holmdel, Hazlet and Aberdeen.
>> JCP& L has said the Monmouth County Reliability Project, a third transmission line into Red Bank, would serve the area and improve system reliability.
>> The case now goes to the state Board of Public Utilities, which can accept, modify or reject the judge’s decision.
>> In her decision, Cookson said, “JCP& L has not met its burden of proof” that the transmission line is necessary.
>> Using the NJ Transit’s right-of-way to install the power line’s monopoles, which would have an average height of 135 feet and a maximum height of 210 feet, “is untried, untested and likely infeasible due to its narrow width, age, and proximity to residential communi-ties,” Cookson wrote.
>> The utility also set up “‘straw men’ alternatives” and “failed to give much more than short shrift to alternative corridors and ignored nontransmission solutions entirely,” the decision states.
>> Cookson said JCP& L initially selected the corridor for the power line in January 2010 to rectify a “problem” that was not identified until 10 months later. Its potential corridor and route selection studies “were an exercise directed at a foregone conclusion,” the judge wrote.
>> A group, Residents Against Giant Electric, raised nearly a half of a million dollars to fight JCP& L’s proposal during regulatory hearings. A group of affected towns hired a lawyer to fight it as well.
>> Rachael Kanapka, president of Residents Against Giant Electric, praised the decision.
>> “Today’s decision by Judge Cookson denying JCP& L’s proposed Monmouth County Reliability Project is a clear vindication of the nearly two-year effort by Residents Against Giant Electric to halt this unnecessary, costly and dangerous plan that would have devastated neighborhoods in Red Bank, Middletown, Holmdel, Hazlet and Aberdeen while benefiting only the executives and shareholders of FirstEnergy,” Kanapka said in a statement, referring to JCP& L’s Akron, Ohiobased parent company, FirstEnergy.
>> In a statement, JCP& L said it will review the decision before determining the utility’s next steps.
>> “We strongly disagree that JCP& L failed to prove the need for the Monmouth County Reliability Project,” the utility said. “The initial decision contradicts the findings made by the regional grid operator and industry experts.
>> “Any alternatives to the proposed project would cause significantly greater disruption to the community, environmental impacts and project costs.”
>> PJM Interconnection, the organization that oversees the electric grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C., has identified the transmission line as a necessary project to reduce the length and frequency of outages in Monmouth County.
>> JCP& L warned of the potential for extended, widespread power outages should the two other transmission lines that run into Red Bank, which are hung next to each other on the same structures, fail at the same time.
>> But Kanapka has said one of RAGE’s experts, electric utility consultant P. Jeffery Palermo, found a “better way” to cure JCP& L’s predicament without spending at least $111 million on a new transmission line.
>> Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, R-Monmouth, suggested that JCP& L withdraw. “It’s a testament to the power of citizen action and to the fairness of the justice system even in what someone could easily have characterized as a David versus Goliath situation,” Handlin said.
>> “The board need not waste its time on this,” she said. “This is dead on arrival. My hope is that JCP& L pulls it back.”
>> Red Bank Mayor Pasquale Menna said JCP& L’s proposal is wrong for Red Bank and its neighboring towns. “In Red Bank’s case, the lines would have projected themselves in a neighborhood that is undergoing a substantial revitalization and vitality.”
>> U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said he agreed with Cookson’sconclusions. “The decision only supports my long-held suspicion that MCRP is more about rate of return for shareholders than reliability for consumers,” he said in a statement. “While the fight is not over, the ruling today is an important victory and a testament to the work of so many committed citizens who have opposed this project.” U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said the project’s potential health hazard to children as a result of low-frequency magnetic fields and the impact to nearby property values were among his concerns.
>> “It is a sweeping repudiation of JCP& L’s whole rationale,” Smith said of the decision. “The die has been cast. They would be fools, foolish and fools, to proceed with this … very illthought- out proposal.”
>> David P. Willis: @dpwillis732; 732-6434039 <tel:(732)%20643-4039>; dwillis@gannettnj.com <mailto:dwillis@gannettnj.com>; facebook. com/dpwillis732.
>
>
>
>
> --
> This email and any attachments are strictly confidential and the addressee(s) shall not forward, disclose, or copy this email or attachments to any third party without the consent of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy, or take any action in reliance on this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please notify us on +1 631 604-4434 or via email as soon as possible. Addressees should check all attachments for viruses. We make no representations as regards the absence of viruses in any attachments.