Scheduling Order for Brookings Remand

Filed under:Brookings Routing Docket — posted by admin on August 26, 2010 @ 10:59 am

Oh, my, the sleep-deprived life of a new mom… of a pup that is… can’t keep up…

Here’s the Scheduling Order that came out on the CapX 2020 Brookings-Hampton remand to the ALJ:

Prehearing Order I

Note the intervention deadline — September 2, 2010!

Get ready for hearings, October 4-6 at locations yet to be announced, and October 20-22 in St. Paul if necessary:

Schedule

CapX 2020 in Gaylord Hub

Filed under:Brookings Routing Docket — posted by admin on @ 10:47 am

Oops, forgot to post this, in the Gaylord Hub, about the Brookings transmission line remand:

Uncertainty remains where powerlines will be located

August 19th, 2010

Sibley County will have new electrical transmission lines constructed here in several years, but where they will be located has yet to be determined.

Randy Fordice of CapX2020, the project that proposes a 345 kV transmission line from South Dakota to the Twin Cities, updated Sibley County Commissioners last week.

Sibley County properties will be affected as part of the Brookings to Hampton Route. Sixty miles of the route from the Cedar Mountain substation to Helena substation, which includes portions of Sibley County, has not yet been determined because of the uncertainty where the power line will cross the Minnesota River, either at Le Sueur or Belle Plaine.

Although the Le Sueur crossing is in the preferred route, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service believes there would be less of an impact on eagles at Belle Plaine, according to Fordice. The Office of Energy has recommended the Belle Plaine crossing.

More hearings will be scheduled in the future, and Fordice anticipates this area of the route will be set either later this year or early next year.

The majority of the preferred route, from west of Winthrop east, is located south of Highway 19. In the Gaylord area, the preferred route would be just north of County Road 8.

The alternate route would be north of County Road 10 from Highway 15, head north for about a mile on County Road 13, and then head east.

One route would have the transmission lines head north on County Road 3 between Gibbon and Winthrop. Another possibility would have the line head south in Cornish Township, head east through Cornish, Alfsborg, and Sibley Townships, and then head north along County Road 13 in Sibley and Dryden Townships, head east along Highway 5, and then head north a couple miles west of Arlington.

Affected landowners will be contacted for easements in 2011. The routes have 150 foot right-of-ways. The single pole structures would have three conductors on each side, and would be located about 1,000 feet apart.

MOES’ Glahn denies appeal of EIS scope

Filed under:Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse — posted by admin on @ 10:33 am

moes-tavernBill Glahn, of the Minnesota Office of Energy Security, has denied the NoCapX 2020 and United Citizen Action Network appeal of his scoping decision for the CapX 2020 Hampton-LaCrosse (Alma) transmission project.  No surprise, but the agency’s steadfast refusal to join with the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service to do an Environmental Impact Statement just leaves me shaking my head.  Oh, and of course there’s a bit of steam coming out the ears!

Glahn Denial of NoCapX & U-CAN Appeal of EIS Scope

Here’s our Appeal:

NoCapX & U-CAN Appeal of Scoping Decision

And the EIS Scoping Decision that we were appealing:

CapX Hampton-LaCrosse (Alma) Scoping Decision

And apparently the rule that Glahn cited in “his” Bemidji-Grand Rapids EIS scoping decision, affirming the necessity of the state to work with the feds, means nothing here:

4410.3900 JOINT FEDERAL AND STATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS.

Subpart 1.  Cooperative processes.

Governmental units shall cooperate with federal agencies to the fullest extent possible to reduce duplication between Minnesota Statutes, chapter 116D, and the National Environmental Policy Act, United States Code 1976,
title 42, sections 4321 to 4361.

Subp. 2.  Joint responsibility.

Where a joint federal and state environmental document is prepared, the RGU and one or more federal agencies shall be jointly responsible for its preparation. Where federal laws have environmental document requirements in addition to but not in conflict with those in Minnesota Statutes, section 116D.04, governmental units shall cooperate in fulfilling these
requirements as well as those of state laws so that one document can comply with all applicable laws.

Subp. 3. Federal EIS as draft EIS.

If a federal EIS will be or has been prepared for a project, the RGU shall utilize the draft or final federal EIS as the draft state EIS for the project if the federal EIS addresses the scoped issues and satisfies the standards set forth in part 4410.2300.



image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace