Motion to Strike CapX’s Feb 8 filing

Filed under:Nuts & Bolts,Uncategorized — posted by admin on February 16, 2010 @ 8:57 am

gavel

Just now, I’ve filed a Motion to Strike the Applicant’s “Comment” filed at the close of business February 8, 2010, the deadline.  Why?  Because they’re filing 3/4″ of stuff at the very end of everything, there’s no way to do Discovery, there’s no way to cross them, and what really did it for me was the graphic “birds-eye view” of transmission blowout.  Look at this and play “What’s wrong with this picture?”

attachment4-fullCan’t see it?  Try this, and you can blow it up all you want:

CapX – Feb 8 – Attachment 4

This was an issue in Susquehanna-Roseland, with even wider blowout range, due to the much longer ruling span:

PSEG Blowout Chart

In their filing, they go on about:

A.    Minnesota River Crossings
B.    Route Width
C.    Myrick Alignment Alternative, Bimeda, Inc.
D.    MNDOT Right-of-Way
E.    Sky Harbor Airpark
F.    Kruger Property
G.    Right-of-Way for Lyon County – Minnesota Valley 115kV Line
H.    Installation of Second Set of Davit Arms
I.    Fiber Optic Cable in Shield Wire
J.    Insulin Pumps
K.    Buffalo Herds
L.    Honeybees

And the problem, as I see it, is that there’s so much here that they’ve known for a long time and haven’t disclosed, and instead they kept up the fiction, through the public hearings, through the evidentiary hearings, that the LeSueur Crossing was the “Modified Preferred” route when, instead, there were clearly identified problems that would rule out that crossing, and the Belle Plaine crossing, as the “alternate” didn’t get the attention it needed when attention was misfocused on LeSueur.  There was not a public hearing in Belle Plaine, and there was no EIS “meeting” (they’re not hearings anymore) in Belle Plaine.  So, folks… what’s wrong with this picture…

Applicants’ “Comment” Letter

Attachment 1 – 1a of 3

Attachment 1 – 1b of 3

Attachment 1 – 2 of 3

Attachment 1 – 3a of 3

Attachment 1 – 3b of 3

(2 is missing, I have to break it down to upload it — later!)

(3 is missing, I have to break it down to upload it — later!)

Attachment 4 – Birds-eye View

Attachment 5 – Valberg on Honeybees

I’m weawwy weawwy tired of these utilities thinking they can just dump whatever they’ve got at the last minute , that they can withhold information developed in meetings with agencies, that they know that there’s a problem and they don’t disclose… that is sooooo naughty.

Produce maps at the hearings, “supplemental” testimony, on and on and on… PSEG’s no different, these guys all operate from the same playbook.

Just couldn’t let this last one slide…

strikeout

ANSWER: What’s wrong with the above “birds-eye” graphic is that their measurements of blowout start from the centerline, and not the point where the transmission line is actually connected — so their numbers are shy by about 20 feet…

one comment so far »

  1. This process has been flawed from the very beginning. Congratulations Carol for hanging in there. Spoke to a Bimeda person in LeSueur February 16th, the work staff at that plant, the alternative LeSueur route, is steamed!! Thank you again, Carol, for exposing this corrupt process.

    Comment by ART and BARBARA STRAUB — February 17, 2010 @ 4:35 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)




image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace