click to download NYRI’s farewell note to the NYPSC, or read it below. Following animation by shapeshifter, courtesy aniboom.com

COUCH WHITE , counselors and attorneys at law
Couch White, LLP
540 Broadway
P.O. Box 22222
Albany, New York 12201-2222
(518) 426-4600
Leonard H. Singer, Partner

VIA HAND DELIVERY & E-MAIL
Hon. Jeffrey Stockholm
Hon. Michelle Phillips
New York State Public Service Commission
Empire State Plaza
Agency Building Three – 18th Floor
Albany, New York 12207

Re: Case No.: 06-T-0650 - Application of New York Regional Interconnect Inc. for
a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need Pursuant to
Article VII for a High Voltage Direct Current Electric Transmission Line
Running Between National Grid’s Edic Substation in the Town of Marcy, and
Central Hudson Gas & Electric’s Rock Tavern Substation Located in the Town
of New Windsor

Dear Judge Stockholm and Judge Phillips:

New York Regional Interconnect Inc. (“NYRI”) understands that some parties may be
confused by NYRI’s April 6, 2009 letter in this case. NYRI’s April 6 letter was not intended
to state anything different than what was stated during the April 3 hearing. However, to theextent further clarification is needed, NYRI confirms that it has withdrawn its application fora Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need pursuant to Article VII of the Public Service Law in Case No. 06-T-0650.

Please call me if you have any questions.

Very truly yours,
COUCH WHITE, LLP
Leonard H. Singer
LHS/dp
cc: Hon. Jaclyn Brilling (via Hand Delivery and email)

Active Parties List in Case 06-T-0650 (via email List Server & Litigation Service list)

Please mail the following letter immediately. If you have it in you, please send it out to friends and relatives and ask them to send a letter also.

Why the letter’s important: FERC’s guaranteed 13.5% repay clause affects ALL U.S. TAXPAYERS. It makes people far and wide pay for transmission projects aimed to benefit urban centers. Besides, if we win this one, the NYRI deal will be a lot less likely. So please sign and mail this letter ASAP….

It was written by our friends at SayNo2Nyri from Otisville NY.

Once received at FERC your letter will become part of the official record.

Thank you,
Billy Howard, Lynn Phillips

———————-

(Date) ____________

Docket No. EL08-39-000

Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20426

Dear Mr. Kelliher:

New York Regional Interconnect (“NYRI”) recently applied to FERC under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to receive incentive-based rate treatment at a rate of return of 13.5 % to pay for the price of constructing a power line that would run from Oneida County to Orange County in New York. If the application is approved, local ratepayers would end up footing the bill for a significant portion of the costs to build the power line, and would probably pay more for their electricity.

New York Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton have joined Congressmen Michael Arcuri, John Hall and Maurice Hinchey in calling on FERC to deny NYRI’s application, which could cost New Yorkers billions of dollars. Granting NYRI incentive-based rate treatment at a rate of return of 13.5 % is premature and fails to promote a selection of cheaper, alternative routes, if any is needed at all. NYRI’s request presumes the need for any new power line in this area and ignores the ongoing litigation before the New York State Public Service Commission, the agency that will ultimately decide that issue.

At first NYRI pledged to foot the entire bill for this project “at no risk to New Yorkers,” but now it claims it needs federal incentives to pay for the project. FERC must deny NYRI’s flawed and premature application because the company has failed to explore cheaper alternatives to the power line and has rejected viable suggestions by the very communities that the line would affect. With the enactment of EPAct 2005, Congress did not intend to give FERC a blank check to hand out to the builders of new transmission lines.

I support our New York Senators and Congressmen and urge FERC to deny
NYRI’s application.

Sincerely,

___________________________________

(Signature)

(Printed name & address)

_________________________________

_________________________________

_________________________________

Articles (some of them long and windy) follow this index:

1. The PSC sent NYRI back to the drawing board – again. It rejected the corporation’s latest application as “incomplete.” So: the clock that gives the state one year to decide before FERC moves in isn’t ticking yet. (a) (b)

2. Environmental and states’ rights individuals and groups (including Sen. Hillary Clinton) are trying to block EPACT 2005 from giving the federal government what could be absolute power over transmission line siting. (a) (b) (c)

3. The town of Utica petitions the FERC to refuse a profit guarantee of over 13% to NYRI’s investors. Amazingly, such a deal is in the offing to encourage the company to take the “risk” of building a line. (This is an entirely new definition of investor risk.)

4. Regional groups remain steadfastly opposed to NYRI’s “new” proposal, saying it isn’t needed: “A $300 million solution to a $25 million a year problem.” says one guy. (As you’ll see below, the actual budget of NYRI’s power line has now doubled — to $2 billlion (two thousand million $$$) (a) (b)

5. The DOE refuses petitions from a multitude of organizations and individuals to reconsider its designation of most of the east and west coasts as “National Interest Energy Transmission Corridors” (NIETCs). The designation lasts 12 years and grants the federal government (at its discretion) absolute power over the location of transmission lines if states don’t agree with its analysis of “need” or meet the guidelines and timelines it sets. (a) (b)

6. In its massive new filing, NYRI’s budget tops $2bil but it promises energy savings for all. Well, ALMOST all. (And we can use our savings to pay its 13% guaranteed profit, plus whatever enterprise or development zone grants it manages to squeeze out the state once we’re dependent on it.)

7. New technologies like superconductors that increase energy efficiency for transmission need more R&D funding. The promise they hold can’t be unlocked in the current financial environment where massive subsidies go to conventional and already profitable energy solutions.

8. A Citizen argues against Marcy South. There are backyards there too.

9. Acuri writes the NY PSC asking it to press NYRI to evaluate the thruway route, which it dismissed too readily – and perhaps unnecessarily — as illegal.

10. Opposition to FERC’s overreaching and to EPACT’s potential impact is nationwide. (a) (b) (I know, we covered that already — but if you’re still reading, you’re an info glutton, and I will feed you.

After these articles are links to all the PSC and FERC documents you can eat.

So here we go, readers and readettes:

ONE (A)

03/24/2008 (our case number is ) 06-T-0650

NY PSC Notices — Transmission

File Size: 15952
View Document

New York Regional Interconnect Inc., Notice to Parties
View All Documents with this Case Number
View All Documents issued on 03/24/2008

Letters Transmission

File Size: 51371
View Document

New York Regional Interconnect Inc. - Letter to Leonard H. Singer, Esq., Couch White, LLP and Chris Thompson, President, New York Regional Interconnect Inc. from Jaclyn A. Brilling, Secretary, regarding application deficiencies
View All Documents with this Case Number
View All Documents issued on 03/24/2008

One (B)

Source unknown:

New York Regional Interconnect, or NYRI applies, for a second time, to run a power line from the Utica area downstate, and for the second time the application is sent back.
The Public Service Commission says it wants revisions.
Among the cited deficiencies:

–A study of how the line would impact the statewide electrical system is missing.
–Aerial photos of the route don’t give enough information.
The formal review process for the application can’t begin until the PSC says the applications complete. PSC spokesman James Denn said applications are sometimes returned more than once, and companies can resubmit as many times as they want.

TWO (a):

From the 2/13/2008 Radio Free Hamilton.

Sen. Clinton Joins Others Asking for Corridor Hearings
Presidential Candidate and U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton has joined a bipartisan group
Senators calling on the Energy Committee to hold hearings on National Interest
Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETC). Created by the Energy Policy Act of
2005, NIETC bypass state siting authority for projects like the New York Regional
Interconnect, Inc. project. More

_______

February 12, 2008

Clinton Calls on Energy Committee to Hold Hearings on Proposed Power Line Corridor

Department of Energy Plan Would Allow NYRI to Bypass New York State Siting Process

Washington, DC—Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton today joined Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) and a bipartisan group of Senators in calling on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to hold hearings on the Department of Energy’s (DoE) National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (NIETC) program. In a letter to the Committee’s chairman and ranking member, Clinton and 13 other Senators highlighted that the current NIETC plan fails to comply with existing federal laws protecting environmental quality and public lands, and that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) plan bypasses states’ siting authority for power corridors.

“NYRI’s proposed power corridor would cut a swath through numerous New York communities over New Yorkers’ strong objections. I urge my colleagues who sit on the Energy Committee to investigate the way that the full implications of the 2005 law that would enable the federal government to override New York and a number of other states in siting power lines,” said Senator Clinton.

Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT), Congress authorized the DoE to designate “national interest electric transmission corridors” in congested areas of the high-voltage power grid. Last year, the DoE designated such a corridor that stretches along the East Coast and encompasses a large chunk of New York State, running from Oneida County to Orange County and cutting through federally protected parks and scores of local communities. Under EPACT, FERC was given the authority to override state denials of applications to build power lines under certain conditions.

Senator Clinton has long been a vocal and tireless advocate for those New Yorkers who are opposed to New York Regional Interconnect’s (NYRI) proposed power line route. Recently, Senator Clinton praised the decision of a federal judge in U.S. District Court in Albany to dismiss a lawsuit brought by NYRI that challenged a state law protecting homeowners from the use of eminent domain by private power companies. She has also joined with Senator Schumer to introduce legislation to fix the law in order to give the State of New York the final say on the siting of power lines.

The text of the letter follows:
Dear Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Domenici:

The energy bill recently approved by both the Senate and House of Representatives makes important advances for our nation’s energy independence and security with increased efficiency and alternative energy development. We are concerned, however, that the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (NIETC) program authorized under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and implemented by the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) does not fully take into account other important options to our national grid such as investments in advanced electrical grid technologies, local generation of clean alternatives, and energy efficiency.

When Congress authorized Section 1221 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, its intent was not to include such large swaths of land as were recently designated by DOE. Rather, the purpose was to ensure the grid’s reliability to prevent potential blackouts in heavily congested regions. Only recently have the impacts become evident with DOE’s final designation of the Mid-Atlantic and Southwest Corridors, which include portions of ten states, 220 congressional districts, and affect more than 72 million people.

Broad state and local opposition has arisen, in part, because some assert that DOE has failed to implement the NIETC program in accordance with the statutory requirements of Section 1221 to consult with states prior to designation, assess and evaluate transmission needs and non-transmission alternatives, and comply with existing federal laws protecting environmental quality and public lands. In addition, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a NIETC ruling that reverses long-standing policy and allows federal preemption of the states’ transmission siting authority within the designated Corridors.

Despite receiving more than 2,000 comments of concern, DOE published its final designation of the two Corridors, covering over 116,000 square miles, on October 5, 2007 with only minor changes to the draft proposals. Private citizens, elected officials, public utilities commissions, and groups representing historic, land, and environmental interests have filed petitions in opposition to DOE’s NIETC designation process. On December 5, 2007, DOE agreed to reconsider these comments. However, they did not stay the implementation of the program to allow for this substantive review.

In order to avoid continued conflict and adverse consequences, we urge you to take timely action to allow full consideration of the significant national and state implications of the NIETC program. Congressional oversight is needed now because many of the ten designated states currently have applicable transmission projects pending before their public utility commissions with less than a year for final action before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may intervene. We strongly believe that the Energy and Natural Resources Committee must hold hearings and bring all pertinent information to bear on the broad implications of the NIETC.

Thank you in advance for your consideration of our request. We cannot overstate the importance of the impact of the NIETC program on our constituents and states.

Sincerely,

Robert P. Casey Jr. (D-PA)
Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Ben Cardin (D-MD)
George Voinovich (R-OH)
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)
Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
John Warner (R-VA)
Joe Biden (D-DE)
Jim Webb (D-VA)
Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
Tom Carper (D-DE)

TWO (b):

From the 3/15/2008 Mid-Hudson News.

Weekend March 15-16, 2008

Lawsuit filed over Energy Department’s transmission corridor designations

DENVER, CO – A lawsuit filed in a federal court could have ramifications on New York Regional Interconnection’s planned 190 mile long power line from Oneida County to Orange County.

Three groups, California Wilderness Coalition, Natural Resources Defense Council and The Wilderness Society Thursday filed the suit in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, contending the Energy Department violated the law when it designated National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors across huge areas of land in the Mid-Atlantic and Southwest.

Wilderness Society Senior Counsel Nada Culver said the lawsuit was filed after the federal agency denied a rehearing into the designation.

“We feel that the Department of Energy had a clear direction from Congress and also had a clear obligation to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act,” she said. “In both situations, the agency really should have looked at the actual effects of these designations on the ground and a real alternative to doing what they’ve done prior to just abrogating everyone’s authority over to the Department of Energy and to FERC to allow federal projects on all of our lands.”

The Mid-Atlantic NIETC would impact lands in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, West Virginia, Ohio, Maryland, Virginia and Washington, DC.

There is widespread opposition to the NYRI project.

TWO (c):

From the 2/12/2008 Land Trust Alliance website.

http://www.lta.org/conservation_defense/utility_corridor.html

Utility Corridors Threaten Extraordinary Public Land

2/11/08 Update:

Eleven environmental organizations sued the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in January over DOE’s designation of an eight-state area where federal eminent domain can be used to fast track new high-voltage transmission lines. Led by the National Wildlife Federation and the Piedmont Environmental Council, the groups filed suit because of DOE’s failure to study potential environmental impacts.

The Alliance is assisting by hosting this conservation defense section of the website and discussion group. Also see an article from the new Exchange on tactics to fight condemnation.

Recent articles:

• “Environmentalists sue DOE,” Boston Globe (MA), 1/14/08
• “Proposed power corridor focus of lawsuit,” The Wilmington News Journal, 1/19/08

THREE:

From the 3/28/2008 Times Herald-Record.

Utica tells feds to refuse NYRI filing for big return

By Steve Israel

March 28, 2008 6:00 AM

UTICA — The feds should refuse a request for a 13.5 percent return for investors of the huge power line that would cut through our region, the upstate City of Utica said in a motion recently filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
New York Regional Interconnect, which hopes to build a 190-mile-long power line from Utica to New Windsor, has asked FERC to reimburse it for the cost of the $2 billion line, as well as the 13.5 percent return for investors.
Both costs would be passed along to ratepayers.
sisrael@th-record.com

FOUR (a)

NYRI Opponents Optimistic

Optimism among opponents of NYRI, that their efforts to slow and eventually block the 190-mile long power line are working.

Topple the towers was the rallying cry at this meeting Friday night in Sherburne.
At first, NYRI conceded that shipping hyrdropower to New York City would raise electric rates upstate.But in it’s amended application to the PSC, NYRI did a 180, saying the power line would stimulate new generation capacity, and cut costs.

Ken Johnson of Earlville says NYRI’s economic case doesn’t make sense.”We get painted as being NIMBYs. You know, Not In My Back Yard. But it’s not about that at all. It’s really about something that just isn’t needed. It makes no economic sense at all. It’s only going to make a few people very wealthy. It’s a 300 million dollar solution to a 25 million dollar a year problem.”

The fact that 2 years after being proposed, the project is still mired in regulatory reviews is seen as good news, by Eve Ann Shwartz, co chair of Stop NYRI. “The longer it takes for them, the harder they have to fight, the greater likelihood that we will win eventually because their investors are going to realize that’s it’s just too costly to achieve their goal of making profit off of us* Shwartz says she expects the Public Service Commission to reject NYRI’s application, about one year from now.

(*I agree that buying time is our best bet — but not for this reason — LP)

FOUR (b)

From the 3/9/2008 Times Herald-Record.

Power-line foes pack meeting

By Steve Israel
Times Herald-Record

March 09, 2008

OTISVILLE — So what if a new route of the massive power line proposed for our region slices under this western Orange County village, and not above it, as first planned?

Folks are so dead set against New York Regional Interconnect, even a church graveyard has a red anti-NYRI sign.

Yesterday, two weeks after NYRI submitted new alternative routes to the state Public Service Commission, about 100 Orange and Sullivan residents braved sheets of rain to hear why the 190-mile-long power line is still wrong.

“We don’t need this; we don’t want this regardless of where it goes,” SayNo2NYRI’s Gail Heatherly of Otisville told the firehouse full of red anti-NYRI signs and shirts. “It’s going to lower our property values, increase our taxes and have a negative effect on the environment and tourism.”

And then SayNo2NYRI’s Nina Neighmond of the Town of Wallkill ticked off a slew of reasons why going underground in Otisville or building 10-story-high towers anywhere along the route from Utica to New Windsor is bad. NYRI would have to blast land it doesn’t yet own to dig beneath the village, she said. Zoning laws would have to be waived and access roads and storage areas would be carved in fields and forests.

“And they’re only going to tell us exactly where they’ll build once they get (approved),” she said.

That’s why an alternative route the PSC forced NYRI to examine — alongside the existing Marcy-South power line route — might be the lesser of evils, said Heatherly. But that would still mean taking land next to those lines that cuts through Sullivan and Orange counties. So power line foes want NYRI to explore building along the New York State Thruway — which NYRI says is prohibited by law if another route is “feasible.”

But even here in this hot spot of NYRI opposition, folks know fighting the $2 billion power line is a tall order — especially since the federal government could eventually approve it regardless of what the PSC rules.

So the opposition leaders urged these regular folks to turn out to the public hearings that should be scheduled in the next few months.

“Our voices have to be heard,” said Neighmond. “This is not over. This is just beginning.”

sisrael@th-record.com

FIVE (a):

From the 3/7/2008 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Foes of power line corridors lose again

Energy Department affirms October ruling

Friday, March 07, 2008

By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The U.S. Department of Energy has cleared the way for construction of a high-voltage electric transmission line in Washington and Greene counties and through wide corridors in the northeastern and southwestern United States.

The DOE announced yesterday that it was affirming its October decision to designate 52 of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties and broad swaths of seven other northeastern states as part of a national interest electric transmission corridor, or NIETC. It also reaffirmed a southwestern corridor in southern California and Arizona.

Authorized by a 2005 federal energy law, such corridor designations make it easier to build power lines in those areas by giving the federal government the power to approve such projects over the objections of local and state officials.

The DOE ruling denied 71 requests for a rehearing from citizens groups and state agencies, including the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission and the state Department of Environmental Protection, saying the challenges were “without merit.”

Allegheny Power’s plan to construct 37 miles of a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt power line through Washington and Greene counties must still get PUC approval, but the DOE decision announced yesterday provides a “backstop” should the state commission balk.

Doug Colafella, a spokesman for Allegheny Power, said the transmission line to carry power from southwestern Pennsylvania through West Virginia into northern Virginia is needed to prevent electric supply problems that studies show could occur by 2011.

“The DOE decision underscores the importance and need for enhanced transmission in this country. Our transmission system is not keeping pace with demand,” he said.

Pennsylvania’s PUC will hold hearings on the project during the last week of this month in Pittsburgh. Public hearings are taking place this week in Virginia, and a decision by the Public Service Commission of West Virginia is due May 2.

Mr. Colafella said the company is committed to working through the state agencies and commissions to get approval for the project. That might be tough in Pennsylvania, where the PUC, the DEP and Gov. Ed Rendell have opposed the corridor designations and the transmission line.

“We’re disappointed with the DOE ruling. This transmission line is only going to depreciate property values and offer no real benefit to Pennsylvania citizens,” said Neil Weaver, a DEP spokesman, adding that the department is reviewing the decision and weighing an appeal.

Greene County Commissioners Chairwoman Pam Snyder said the power line project adds a health risk to a county already living with pollution from dirty coal-fired power plants.

“It’s a sorry day when our federal government takes the word of the power company over the interests of its citizens and allows something like this to be shoved down our throats,” she said. “We will continue to hope and fight.”

Denise DiNunzio, a spokeswoman for the state Public Utility Commission, declined comment, saying the commission had not yet reviewed the 48-page decision.

Don Hopey can be reached at dhopey@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983.

First published on March 7, 2008 at 12:00 am

FIVE (b):

From the 3/7/2008 Electric Light & Power.

DOE denies rehearing request for transmission corridor designations

Washington, D.C., Mar. 7, 2008 — The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) denied requests for rehearing of the Mid-Atlantic and the Southwest Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (National Corridors) designated by DOE in October 2007 as areas of significant electricity congestion and constraint. The designation of national corridors was made in accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). In affirming the National Corridor designations, the DOE dismissed as being without merit challenges raised by the applicants for rehearing, citing data analysis conducted in its 2006 National Interest Electric Transmission study, opportunity for public review and comment, and other reasons.

DOE reviewed the specific issues raised by applicants for rehearing and cited reasons for denying the requests in an order sent to the Federal Register. The DOE said that the findings of congestion in the designated areas are well-founded and based on data and studies as required by statute, and were based on analysis demonstrating that persistent transmission congestion that adversely affects consumers exists in these two areas. The DOE also highlighted that its approach to defining the geographic boundaries of the affected areas is consistent with the statutory requirements.

The DOE also said it is not required by statute to analyze non-transmission alternatives for relief of congestion prior to issuing a National Corridor designation. The DOE also said federal statutes such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act are not applicable to the DOE’s designation of national corridors. Reviews under those statutes would be conducted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission before Federal approval could be granted under the Federal Power Act for the construction of a transmission project.

SIX:

From the 2/21/2008 Associated Press.

Feb 21, 6:09 PM EST

AP Newsbreak: NYRI costs rise but cheaper power predicted upstate

By DEVLIN BARRETT
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The total cost of the proposed NYRI power line in central New York has jumped to more than $2 billion, according to new documents that include the company’s prediction the project will lower long-term electricity prices across the state.

New York Regional Interconnect, Inc. delivered a massive supplemental filing to the state’s Public Service Commission late Thursday. A copy of the filing was obtained by The Associated Press.

In the documents, the company specifically rejects the possibility of building the power line along the New York State Thruway, as some elected officials, including Gov. Eliot Spitzer, have suggested. NYRI said the route is “not a feasible alternative” due to federal law.

NYRI contends a 190-mile, 1,200 megawatt direct current line running from the Utica area to Orange County is needed to improve the state’s aging power grid and reduce the threat of blackouts like the one that struck the state in 2003. But the project has generated intense opposition from residents along the proposed path who say it will harm their communities and lead to higher costs for power.

“I believe we’ve addressed all of the major issues, all of the Public Service Commission’s requests,” said NYRI president Chris Thompson. “I think a lot of the opposition comes from misinformation and we believe this filing will clarify and correct the record on that by getting out the actual facts.”

The company submitted three thick binders of documentation to the PSC, hoping to win state approval for the project. As part of the submission, NYRI commissioned an outside company, CRA International, to analyze the project’s impact on power costs around the state.

Statewide, power costs would decline by 4.7 percent in 2012, the first expected year of operation, although in the Mohawk Valley, those costs would rise by 2.9 percent, according to CRA. Over the long term, the company predicted, consumer costs would decline everywhere except for the Capital District. By 2018, the analysts predict, statewide consumer costs would drop 5.7 percent.

Most of the opposition to NYRI has come from those who say building power lines and towers will despoil their communities. The company has sought to win approval for the line to run largely along old railroad rights of way, but the state agency asked NYRI to consider alternate routes.

In the supplemental filing, NYRI for the first time proposes burying the line underground in the most densely populated section near Utica, but the company says doing so for the entire length of the project, as some have suggested, would be too expensive to build and maintain.

Burying the line through the Utica area is the main reason the total cost of the project has risen from $1.6 billion to $2.1 billion, said Thompson.

The company also offered an alternate route along an existing power line called Marcy South, as well as numerous short-distance variations along the original proposed route.

“There are a total of 15 or 16 alternate routings or options,” said Thompson.

The Thruway, they say, is not one of them.

Elected officials, from the governor to Utica-area congressman Michael Arcuri, have suggested the possibility of running NYRI along the Thruway. But the company said federal law only allows such construction if there are no other viable alternatives. Since the company contends that its original proposed route - as well as others - are viable, it argues the Thruway isn’t really an option.

The NYRI bid will now likely lead to formal hearings, and a final decision could still be a year away.

The NYRI project aims to address a perennial state energy issue: how to get power flowing cheaply and easily from its generation sources upstate to meet the ever-growing demands of the New York City area.

NYRI has also become part of a broader argument about the nation’s electric grid and whether the federal government should step in and approve such lines over the objections or local and state authorities.

Most of New York is now part of a federally designated “national interest electric transmission corridor” which would allow Washington officials to step in and approve a power line project if state authorites fail to act. While the law is new, NYRI could end up being its first test, should the company fail to win approval from the state.

SEVEN:

Ken Silverstein EnergyBiz Insider Editor-in-Chief Read Ken’s Blog

The so-called high-temperature superconducting cable must actually be super-cooled. That will virtually eliminate the resistance to electricity flow, thereby greatly increasing the efficiency of the wire. The second-generation technology is one solution to the challenging task of providing sufficient electric power to densely populated areas. Burying cable and acquiring rights-of-way is prohibitively expensive, often representing three-quarters the cost of such projects. With their greater capacity, however, superconducting cables hold lots of promise.

“High-temperature superconductivity has repeatedly demonstrated that it has the potential to play a pivotal role in modernizing our electric infrastructure and ensuring the stable and affordable delivery of electricity to our homes, businesses, and industry,” says Kevin Kolevar, director of the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability for the U.S. Department of Energy. “As the nation’s demand for electricity continues to grow, so too do the pressures on our electric utilities to continue to provide the reliable electric service that is so important to our economy and way of life.”

Part of the Energy Department’s role is to provide funds for research and development into promising new technologies, all to plant the seeds for the time they might become commercially available. The agency justifies its foray into superconducting cables, noting that more than 7 percent of the electricity transported across the wires is lost because of resistance in current copper technologies. At a time when the nation is concerned about fuel supplies and air quality, it is a good investment and would ultimately result in $16 billion a year in savings, it says.

Superconductivity power equipment is not only half the size but it is also far more resourceful than conventional copper technologies. The Energy Department says that about 2,200 miles of existing underground cables are quickly becoming outdated and could be replaced with high-temperature superconductive lines that are less invasive.

Besides the National Grid project in Albany, the agency also has partnerships with American Electric Power in Columbus, Ohio and the Long Island Power Authority in New York. Meantime, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is working with Consolidated Edison to install those cables in Lower Manhattan.

In the case of Albany, a 350-meter modern cable will run between two substations. The project will cost about $27 million, of which the Energy Department will pick up half. It actually got its start in 2001 with a $6 million grant from a New York State energy agency, with some initial installation back in 2006.

“National Grid has been pleased with the performance of the high-temperature superconducting cable during Phase 1 of this program,” says William Flaherty, regional executive director of National Grid. “We are happy to have it back online now .The project has demonstrated that high-temperature superconducting cable works as expected, is reliable, and has posed no problems to National Grid’s system.”

High Cost

To be sure, the cost must still drop considerably for the technology to become widespread. But the good news is that increasing investment into the field is spawning newer prototypes. Once the technology reaches a critical mass, commercialization will start to occur and the price tag will come down.

Intensified research efforts are largely the result of increased attention to the reliability of the nation’s transmission grid. Efforts are also underway, for example, to develop cheaper wire that does not contain silver, called a coated conductor. But such wires have a long way to go before they would be practical. Altogether, the Energy Department has allocated $57 million for research and development for such projects while industry has agreed to put up $60 million.

The agency is now partnering with AEP in a two-year, $9 million project that is testing second-generation superconducting cable. It runs 200 meters and delivers 50 megawatts of power to 8,600 industrial, commercial and residential customers. It is also joining forces with the Long Island Power Authority by allocating $15 million of the $30 million cost of a project there. It is a 138 kilovolt cable system that is nearly a half mile in length. It is the first high-temperature superconductor cable at a transmission site. Other such wires have been used at distribution sites, which are characterized as lines that are 60 kilovolts or less.

The Department of Homeland Security, meanwhile, says that part of its role is to ensure the electricity keeps flowing in major commerce centers. To that end, it is funding $25 million of the $39 million price tag for such technology in New York’s financial district. Con Edison will install the first 50 meters of a 300 meter project by year-end. If all goes well, the full project is expected to be complete in 2010.

“The U.S. power grid is one of our most valuable assets, and we are taking the steps necessary — through the use of our most advanced technologies — to ensure its safety,” says Jay Cohen, under secretary for science and technology with Homeland Security. “As we saw with the August 2003 blackout and in incidents since, disruptions to the power grid have far-reaching effects and a tremendous economic impact.”

High-temperature superconducting cables can increase national and economic security by modernizing the grid. And while the technology is now expensive, government agencies are pitching in and trying to get those next generation wires into the mainstream. In time, it will succeed. The demand for power will not abate and will therefore necessitate the deployment of cutting-edge tools to enhance grid security.

More information is available from Energy Central:

Superconducting Sizzle - A New Cable Technology, EnergyBiz, Nov/Dec 2006

Secure Super Grid Debuts: ConEd Turns to Superconducting Cables, Energy Biz, July/Aug 2007

The Future of Superconducting Transmission, Energy Biz, July/Aug 2007

——————————————————————————- ——————–

Republished with permission from CyberTech, Inc. EnergyBiz Insider is published three days a week by Energy Central. For more information about Energy Central, or to subscribe to EnergyBiz Insider, other e-newsletters and EnergyBiz magazine, please go to http://www.energycentral.com/centers/energybiz/ebi_list.cfm/

EIGHT:

Letter to the Editor from the 3/31/2008 Times Herald-Record.

Don’t follow Marcy-South

The front page of today’s Times Herald-Record reads, “Marcy-South Route for NYRI?” Everyone seems to be leaning toward the Marcy-South route being the lesser of two evils; however, there is NO room for the new power lines.

As per NYRI’s documentation, there needs to be a 150-foot center line-to-center-line distance from the existing Marcy-South power-line towers to any new power-line towers constructed next to them. NYRI would still need to purchase property and/or pursue eminent domain from residents adjacent to the existing Marcy-South lines.

You can barely see the tops of the existing Marcy-South towers from most of the homes in our area. If NYRI constructs the new power lines adjacent to the existing Marcy-South power lines, they will potentially end up in the backyards of many residents.

Please don’t support the Marcy-South route as the easy alternative.

I can see it now: All of the NYRI foes will declare victory and move on and we (residents adjacent to Marcy-South) will be left with the new NYRI lines literally in our backyards.

Brian Gilligan

Campbell Hall

NINE:
From the 2/26/2008 Utica Observer-Dispatch.

Arcuri: NYRI can’t ignore Thruway

By ELIZABETH COOPER

Observer-Dispatch

Posted Feb 26, 2008 @ 09:15 PM

Last update Feb 26, 2008 @ 09:17 PM

AT A GLANCE

NYRI’s supplemental application filed Thursday with the Public Service Commission included possible alternate routes for its proposed power line, but excluded following the New York State Thruway.

If the Public Service Commission determines NYRI’s application is complete, it will begin the process to decide whether to approve the line through the area.

U.S. Rep. Michael Arcuri, D-Utica, said Tuesday he plans to send a letter to the Public Service Commission urging the agency to consider the Thruway route for the proposed power line.

TEN (A):

3/12/2008 Center for Biological Diversity news release

From the 3/31/2008 Boston Globe.

Federal power corridors prompt a backlash

Opposition rises to US grid policy; 2005 act cites national interests

By Judy Pasternak, Los Angeles Times | March 31, 2008

WASHINGTON - There is wide agreement that the nation needs to upgrade the aging system that delivers electricity from power plants to consumers - a grid that already is overtaxed and facing a 43 percent increase in demand over the next two decades.

But opposition is growing to the way the Bush administration has interpreted Congress’s instructions to improve it.

The Department of Energy is making it easier to build high- voltage transmission lines in vast tracts of the country, raising objections among environmentalists, lawmakers, and states that would lose the right to veto power lines within their borders.

The 2005 energy act gave the Energy Department the right to designate national-interest electric transmission corridors, where the federal government can step in to permit transmission towers and wires that have been rejected or delayed by states. In these corridors, the federal government can condemn private land along a power-line route.

Now the department has set up two corridors that cover huge swaths of territory. The western zone includes Southern California and western Arizona. The eastern zone cuts from New York to Virginia and inland across large sections of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio.

Transmission of electricity is critically congested at the core of each zone, the Energy Department says. The new federal authority in the corridors is attracting interest from utilities.

But critics say the zones are too large and were drawn to favor power from plants that run on fossil fuels instead of cleaner sources such as wind, solar, and heat from the Earth’s interior, which also would need transmission if they were to be part of the energy mix.

The chosen contours of this plan, they say, will exacerbate global warming and pollution.

They have cited the potential effect on farmland and natural habitats. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has listed the eastern zone as one of its “11 most endangered places” because of Civil War battlefields, stretches of the Appalachian Trail, designated historic districts, and scenic rivers that could fall within power-line paths.

Bush administration officials like to compare their initiatives to President Eisenhower’s creation of the interstate highway system, and they say it will help keep energy prices down.

“The grid is the ultimate balancing act. The larger the grid is, the easier it is to balance,” said Kevin Kolevar, an assistant secretary of Energy who directs the three-year-old Office of Electricity Delivery and Reliability.

More than 157,000 miles of high-voltage wires in the United States send electricity to where it is needed. But the electrical grid as currently constituted is four separate regional sets of wires, with few connections between them.

Additions to this infrastructure have been slow, with 668 miles of interstate transmission built since 2000. Each state makes a separate decision on its part of the route.

Kolevar said the new zones were large to allow for flexibility in determining the sites for the lines, so that sensitive areas could be avoided. As for fossil fuels versus alternatives, the department is “generation-neutral. We really are,” he said.

The crux of the problem lies with proposals for power lines that cross state borders, Kolevar said. States, he said, “can’t take a Confederate point of view and not consider the needs of their neighbors.”

There is one escape hatch for states in the corridors, he added: When three or more states form a compact for transmission planning, the federal government will cede its authority to that group. “We need to see these states coming together, binding themselves to one another,” he said.

Environmental groups have filed separate federal lawsuits against the designation of each national interest corridor. Virginia recently sued the Energy Department in the Fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee plans to hold hearings on transmission, and Chairman Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, said he expects the corridors issue to come up.

The corridors were “the best thing we could think of,” Bingaman said. “We’re just now learning how it’s going to work. We will look to see whether it’s being implemented the way we intended.”

“My office has filed a legal challenge against the Federal Department of Energy seeking to prevent the Federal Government from taking over the approval process for the New York Regional Interconnect (NYRI). A recent decision by the U.S. Department of Energy would subject major regions of New York State to the development of massive electric transmission lines - including the proposed 200-mile long NYRI line over the state’s objections. The DOE’s action was taken without proper environmental review and could harm residences, businesses and natural resources in the region of the proposed NYRI line. DOE’s action is illegal and through this challenge, I will continue the fight to protect homeowners and the environment in New York and New York’s right to make it’s own energy siting decisions.”

Happy New Year, anti-power-liners!

We got through the last one without getting designated as a NIET Corridor, and we'll get through this one, too. With luck and hard work, we'll also get congress to shred the sections of the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005, aka NEPACT 2005) that allow DOE/FERC to sieze both public and private property for use by private corporations.

Also, we'll continue to fight to keep the NYS Public Service Commission (NYPSC) from accepting NYRI's cynically inadequate proposal or granting NYRI a permit.

Our biggest challenge, however, will be to envision and promote viable alternatives to NYRI's project and any project that uses our country's need for clean, cheap, reliable, renewable energy as an excuse to colonize and defile Upstate New York.

1. Ask our state legislators to reach a compromise on Article X — legislation that makes local generation possible — that is currently stuck between two versions in the state's Senate and House.
2. Thank our state representatives for their past support and urge them to "continue funding the CARI legal team."
3. If you're not an anti-power-line purist, ask that the DOE designate a NIETC corridor for the PJM-NJ proposal; it will shoot juice into NYC without transversing hundreds of miles of land. (see dsmith's comment for more detail)
4. Urge all government representatives to subsidize early stages of local renewable technologies. Ocean, heat-exchange, land-fill methane, etc.
5. Demand that current electrical infrastructure be upgraded before projects like NYRI's are even considered. (Remember, the blackouts we've had have ALL been due to human error or decaying infrastructures — not to paucity of supply.) 
6. Insist upon a national energy policy that is based on a study of ALL viable alternatives — ones that promote what's best for US citizens, not just for the multinational energy lobby. 
7. Keep talking to friends, relatives and neighbors. Keep writing your local papers. Let them know that NYRI isn't dead yet, and is known to keep coming back. Remind them that there are better ways to accomplish what NYRI says it can do. And support your anti-NYRI organizations, locally or route-wide. The buck starts here.

Remember: We've been a great opposition so far — fashionably multi-partisan, laudably constructive and remarkably effective, and our representatives know it. Don't let them forget it.   

Remember the bill that Bonacic introduced that would block NYRI from using eminent domain powers in New York State? Well S8349A isn't law yet — and won't be unless Pataki signs it within the next eight business days. 

Now is the time to urge the governor to sign this bill. 

Bill S8349 is not perfect (read this) but will still serve as a major stumbling block to NYRI.  And, obstacles such as this law may crimp their ability to woo investors and raise funds for the $1.6 billion project. 

This bill attempts to take away NYRI’s ability to use eminent domain to seize property for their right of way. 

Call, write, fax or email Pataki today.

Phone: 518-474-8390

Fax: 518-474-1513

Email: http://161.11.121.121/govemail

Urge him to sign bill S8349A. 

Tell him all New Yorkers are concerned about the abuse of eminent domain by private profit seeking companies who are not serving the interests of the public. 

A personal letter would be great but if you don’t have time here is a sample letter you can use. 

Governor George E. Pataki
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224 

Re: Sign bill S8349a 

Dear Governor Pataki, 

I am writing to urge you to promptly sign bill S8349a into law.  This bill is designed to close a loophole in the Transportation Corporations Act that allows the abuse of eminent domain. This bill was passed by large majorities in both houses and deserves your immediate attention. 

I’m sure that you are aware that there is overwhelming support by New Yorkers all across the state (as well as citizens across the country) for reform of the laws that regulate the use of eminent domain. The power of taking private property for public benefit is a power which should be used in only the most extreme circumstances, and never for private corporations that lack transparency.

Currently, there are organizations which are filing as "Transportation Corporations" for the purpose of circumventing other state laws restricting the use of eminent domain. The Legislature has acted to ensure that eminent domain is truly only used for the most public of purposes and not for the profit of private developers. This bill is a first step in controlling improper uses of eminent domain in New York State.

Please sign bill NYS S8349a into law today.

Sincerely,

(Your Name and address here) 

For a short, boldface letter

…add your name address and phone number to this letter… 

Yet another sample letter and more info can be found here:

http://nyri.info/action.htm#patakiday 

No time to write, no problem… a quick phone call would be great. 

Let’s get this bill signed into law today.

If you are a resident of New York City, please also contact Mayor Bloomberg and urge him to support — or at least to stop opposing — this bill. Here's the contact info and you'll find a sample letter below.

SEND A MESSAGE TO MAYOR MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG 

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg
City Hall
New York, NY 10007
PHONE 311 (or 212-NEW-YORK outside NYC)

FAX (212) 788-2460

E-MAIL:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mayor.html

Dear Mayor Bloomberg,

As a New York City resident with many friends and relatives in Upstate New York, I ask you to council Governor Pataki to sign the Bonacic bill, NYS S8349a, into law. It does not eliminate eminent domain for transportation companies; it only closes a legal loophole that allows a transmission company that is already seeking to circumvent our state laws via federal intervention to acquire eminent domain rights by cynically misrepresenting the true nature of its business. In other words, it is designed to prevent private companies that have demonstrated scorn for the public's will in New York State from sneaking in the back door to wrest control over strategically critical infrastructure.

It is in the interests of the entire state to make sure that the companies we entrust with public projects are transparent and above-board. We have seen in Iraq and in New Orleans that companies that obtain public-interest contracts through cronyism and secrecy end up bilking the public — no matter how attractive their credentials and their original promises may have been. The Bonacic bill helps prevent that type of ethically-challenged company from acquiring private land in our state through self-misrepresentation. It does not end the exemption allowed legitimate transportation companies. 

Thanks for considering our interests,

                                               Respectfully…

(Your name and address) 

(parts of this post, by gstein, were posted earlier. This is an update.) 

Mary Jo Long writes: "The right of a federal agency rather than a New York State agency to make decisions on whether or where electric transmission lines can go is based upon the U.S. Constitution’s grant of power to Congress to "regulate interstate commerce".

Courts have generally allowed the federal government to define interstate commerce very broadly. But the Energy Policy Act of 2005 states that the FERC "shall not have jurisdiction . . . over facilities used in local distribution or only for the transmission of electric energy in intrastate [within one state] commerce". 16 U.S.C.§824(b)(1).

It further says electric energy is in interstate [between two or more states] commerce "if transmitted from a state and consumed at any point outside thereof. . . ." 16 U.S.C.§824(c) "

We keep staring at these quotes. Can anyone explain why the "conventional wisdom" assumes FERC has a role to play, at all, through this or other legislation.

(see comments below…) 

Chris White, District Representative,Office of Congressman Maurice Hinchey

City Hall, Third Floor,  16 James Street

Middletown, NY 10940

(845) 344-3211

(845) 342-2070 (fax)

Carra Matthews in the Binghamton Press & Sun reports advances in cable technology that potentially make grid upgrades more viable than "punching us a whole new set."

Gov. George E. Pataki showcased new technology in the capital that can deliver more power, with more efficiency, than conventional cables.

A group of companies, with financial help from the state and federal governments, developed a high-temperature super-conducting power cable for a live utility grid. The underground cable system is the world's first demonstration project of such technology in a power grid, rather than in a lab or an industrial or substation setting, according to the governor.

She goes on to explain:

The quarter-mile cable between two National Grid power substations in Albany has been operating since late July and can power more than 70,000 households. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority contributed $6.7 million toward the $27 million demonstration project, and the U.S. Department of Energy gave more than $13 million.

The new cable's effectiveness will be monitored over the next year, and part of it will be upgraded with even newer technology.

The high-speed cables can carry three to five times more current than conventional power lines. Also:

* They are lighter, more flexible and easier to install.

* They deliver power at lower voltages, reducing the need for transformers.

* They use liquid nitrogen for cooling, rather than flammable oils, which will help prevent fires or explosions.

Does this mean that a sane and rational upgrade of the current grid could (1) triple the energy flowing along current rights-of-way (2) bury it (3) make it safer? I'm going to check with some people whose grasp of electric tech is better than mine, but it sure sounds like it. 

Speaking with the Press & Sun-Bulletin editorial board on Thursday, Republican gubernatorial candidate John Faso thought so, too.

He cited new technology such as a product by Siemens that can push more voltage through lines. And just last week, Faso said, Gov. Pataki was touting short-distance super-conducting cables that can deliver three to five times more power than current lines.

NYRI had better ram its project through while there are still no-brain FERC planners living who really believe that the best way to spend $1.6 billion and counting is to run a whole new set of giant transmission lines through private residences, commercial centers and public park lands just 30 miles West of Marcy South.  

The long awaited DOE report on congestion — the basis for designating NIET Corridors  allowing federal EmDo intervention — was released today. It can be found on this site
and the index of online material is here.

The DOE's map in its Executive Summary (19+MB) shows us to be part of a "Critical Congestion Area" but we are not described as being part of it. 

Critical Congestion Areas. These are areas of
the country where it is critically important to
remedy existing or growing congestion problems
because the current and/or projected effects of
the congestion are severe. As shown in Figures
ES-2 and ES-3, the Department has identified
two such areas, each of which is large, densely
populated, and economically vital to the Nation.
They are:
° The Atlantic coastal area from metropolitan
New York southward through Northern Virginia,
and
° Southern California.

We'll post more analysis and commentary later. 

Meanwhile, take a look:

The FAQ 

News Release  

The study itself

is 32.8MB. It's formatted for the Web, so the graphics may not print clearly 

Federal Register

Energy efficiency reports 
scroll down to "Energy Department" 

http://www.thrall.org/special/powerlines.html

a good set of introductory links, including one to the Bonacic anti-eminent domain bill that got over-particularlized at the last minute:

STATUS: S8349-A BONACIC
Transportation Corporations Law
TITLE….Prohibits certain transportation corporations that are gas corporations and gas and electric corporations from exercising the right of eminent domain

VOTING:
06/23/06        S8349-A Senate Vote    Aye: 45   Nay: 15
06/23/06   S8349-A    Assembly Vote   Yes: 104   No : 12

BILL TEXT:  STATE OF NEW YORK S8349-A

IN SENATE
June 16, 2006
Introduced by Sens.BONACIC,LARKIN, LIBOUS, MEIER — read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Rules –  committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee [NOTE: THIS IS THE AMENDED VERSION -stpl]

AN ACT to amend the transportation corporation law, in relation to prohibiting transportation corporations that are gas corporations and gas electric corporations from exercising the right of eminent domain

The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:

1    Section 1.  Section 11 of the transportation corporations law is amended by adding a new subdivision 7 to read as follows:

7. Subdivisions three and three-a of this section shall not apply to any merchant transmission company which:
   (a) commences and ends in the state of New York;
   (b)  through its employees, agents, representatives, or assigns, has represented in testimony that the construction of such power trans-mission lines will increase electric rates in any part of the state; and
   (c)  which applied for and did not receive an early designation as a national interest electric transmission corridor under an act of congress commonly known as the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

    § 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

LBD17526-02-6

You can print this why oppose nyri? leaflet and fold it as an accordion handout or fold it in thirds with the printing inside, then address it, stamp it and mail it. 

And here is a leaflet in the same format, called "NYRI's Top 10 Whoppers," detailing some of the most frequent and low-down distortions and lies that NYRI has been feeding the press and public. It's a useful guide when refuting NYRI's misinformation in your local paper and other publications you read. NYRI's new PR firm has been hard at work buffing up its image, so look for an update Whapper Alert soon. 

Because the route is so long — 190 miles, from Utica to Orange County — and different areas have different priorities and legislators, the opposition has been organized on both a regional and route-wide basis.

Citizens' groups spread awareness, get politicans and the press to understand our side of this issue and raise money and collect information for their own and others' legal fights.

The various legal teams are in communication with each other and are increasingly able to divide up the work of defending us against NYRI at the state level while readying for a fight at the federal level.  

Here is a list of active organizations as of October 3rd 2006.

Here's how far we have come and where we need to go:

Of the many battles we have won so far  — the anti-eminent-domain bill Pataki signed on October 3rd, the $1 million in legal defense money promised by the NYS Senate to Upstate Counties (and not yet delivered) and the New York Public Service Commission's request for more information from NYRI before they consider its application for a permit — none of these means that we have won the war to keep giant transmission lines from destroying our chances to prosper.

This could be a long, hard fight, stuttering over the span of a few years. We are doing as well as we are because people have given their time to fight — to write press and politicians, to donate money and volunteer time.

We can win if we keep working for what's right. Pitch in when you can, and stay informed even when you can't. 

Here's a guide to the most common acronyms in the alphabet soup of government bureaucracy. 

what would NYRI power lines be like? 

www.stopthepowerlines.com

The Project:
New York Regional Interconnect, a U.S. corporation, owned by a series of Canadian holding companies, wants to run a high-voltage, direct current (HVDC) power line from Utica to Orange County. It has proposed a primary and a secondary route. Both run through Hancock.

The Towers:
Pipeline route: 83’- 120’ high scaffold-like towers

River route  130’-180’ high monopoles  – taller than the statue of Liberty.

The point is: well above the tree line and visible for many miles.

The Cables:
The cables are made of steel with aluminum cladding. They are uninsulated, but rest on insulated supports. This does not mean, though, that eagles would fry if they sat on them. The cables won’t be “live” that way. They will, however, emit EMFs, 10-40 times stronger than US and European standards that many scientists believe can be harmful.

Each main cable would carry 400,000V and 1.2 billion watts. There will be at least 2 cables on each pole or tower, plus a return.  On the monopoles, there would be room for 2 more cables.

Noise:
Approximately 40-50dB, or roughly half the volume of a passing train. The noise is intermittent. It can be a hum or a buzz.

Safety:  

If a cable fell, it would shut off in 1/3 of a second – but it would still be the equivalent of 40-60 lightning strikes.

NYRI claims that there are no known instances of a DC cable blowing down in a hurricane or a tornado, but the UDPC’s Troy Bystrum says that there is a case of strong winds causing cables to pull a tower down with them.

At the New Windsor public education meeting, a NYRI rep, when asked what would happen if a train derailed and hit a pole, said that it wouldn’t happen, because “trains don’t go very far off the tracks when they derail.” This is simply not true. The NYRI rep also said that derailments were “rare.” Also not true. There was one just this year on the NS line and one May 30^th on the NY Susquehanna & Western.

There may be some danger posed to the metal in a pipeline if it is in close proximity to HVDC cables. The DC current might corrode the pipe from within. 

The debate about a link between ElectroMagnetic Fields and cancer still rages, although statistical evidence is mounting for a link to childhood leukemia, and EMFs are known to damage pace-makers. Some scientists believe that the fields will disorient birds that navigate via magnetic fields, and possibly sterilize eagles.

The Right-of-Way
Along the pipeline route, the right-of-way would add 50’ to the pipeline right-of-way — IF it was allowed to run alongside it. If not, it would create a whole new corridor of "defoliation."

Along the river route, the power lines would need a right-of-way of 150’, adding at least 50’ to current maximum.

NYRI has about 1/8 mi. “wiggle room” off the current right-of-way when placing poles.

It is asking for a total of 1300 feet, or 650’ leeway in each direction off the centerline.  

The Bases /Footings
The bases of the river poles would be 6’ and the cement footing 8’ square by 16-17 feet high. The disruption of animal habitat by the installation of the bases is a concern. 

Distance Between Poles
From 200’ to 800’

Disassembly:
There is currently no plan for removing – or paying to remove – the proposed towers if they become obsolete or economically unviable. NYRI says it will use no public money, but it should add: “Yet!”

What About Property Values?

NYRI has claimed more than once that living under a power line has no effect on property values. But the evidence tells a different story. Overall, property values on homes within sight of power lines can be expected to fall from 10-50% — with the more expensive properties depreciating at the higher rate.

Is the Fight Just a NIMBY Fight?

No. A NIMBY fight (it stands for "Not In My Back Yard") affects only the people directly in the power line's way. But NYRI's project will hurt all of NY State, particularly the North. It's not just that it will raise wholesale electric rates for all those above the Lower Hudson Valley; it will also lower rates in Southeastern New York, (SENY) making Upper New York State businesses and industries even less competitive than they are now. In other words, it makes economic recovery Upstate virtually impossible.   

Is This Thing Really Needed?

It depends whom you ask. NYRI says it is. The Department of Energy (DOE)  is inclined to agree, but hasn't yet — officially. The NYISO thinks it isn't, but might be in eight-to-ten years, 5 years after NYRI is promising to deliver. That's why it's important to push hard NOW for reduced-use and high efficiency technology statewide. 

New York's grid can be balanced and its energy needs supplied by other means. Con Ed has pointed out that it's easier to protect electrical generation systems from terrorist attack if they are decentralized and not located in indefensible remote areas.   

Destroying Upstate New York to feed SENY development is like burning the furniture to warm the slipcovers.  (SENY is what they call South Eastern New York.)

ROUTE-SPECIFIC INFO (alphabetical)

 
Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin
Main Office
4421 Vestal Parkway East
Vestal, NY 13850
(607) 798-1234
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 1270
Binghamton, NY 13902-1270
Letters to the Editor: (607) 798-1124
    REPORTERS
    Liz Hacken    LHacken@pressconnects.com
    "The coalition is the culmination of weeks of discussions"
    Jeff Platsky  JPlatsky@pressconnects.com
    "NYRI line to cost more than projected"
    My-Ly Nguyen  MNguyen@pressconnects.com
    "The public will have a second chance in Norwich"

CoopersTown Crier    
21 Railroad Avenue, Cooperstown
Tel.(607)547-9493   Fax (607)547-1109
Editor  Jim Austin  jaustin@coopercrier.com
Co-editor  Eric Ahlqvist crier@csdsl.net
    REPORTERS   
    Tom Grace — "Neighbors revisit Marcy South power line"
 
 
The Hancock Herald
Weekly. Deadline — Monday @ 10am
P.O. Box 519
Hancock, NY 13783
Phone: (607) 637-3591
Fax: (607) 637-4383
Sally Zegers, Publisher/Editor in Chief
hancockherald@hancock.net

The Journal News (Lower Hudson Online)  Westchester Putnam  Rockland County  
http://www.nyjnews.com/contact/letters.php3?address=letters

Norwich  Evening Sun        
30 Seconds is The Evening Sun's reader reaction column. To have your comments considered for publication in our print edition, call (607) 335-8122. Or to submit your thoughts for the online edition Submit 30 Seconds Online. (http://www.evesun.com/evening-sun/30seconds/submit.htm) Online submissions will appear in the next day's online edition. Preference for publication in our print edition will be given to voicemail messages.
    REPORTERS
    Melissa deCordova   melissad@evesun.com –
    "County leaders strategize against NYRI"
    Jeffrey Morse   jmorse@evesun.com –
    "Senate hearing on NYRI project tonight"

Oswego Daily News 
17 Cayuga Street Fulton, NY 13069
Phone: 593-2510 Fax: 593-2515  
E-mail:   oswegoeditor@dailynewsdirector.com

Oswego Palladium Times Online Edition        
Editor Gary Catt   gary.catt@palltimes.com

River Reporter
Offices:
93 Erie Ave., Narrowsburg, New York,
845/252-7414, FAX 845/252-3298.
Mailing address:
PO Box 150, Narrowsburg, NY 12764.
     REPORTERS
     FritzMayer  845 252-7414
     fritzmayer@riverreporter.com
     editor@riverreporter.com
     publisher@riverreporter.com

Sullivan County Democrat
P.O. Box 308
5 Lower Main Street
Callicoon, NY 12723
Phone: 845-887-5200 (Callicoon)
845-794-7942 (Monticello)
Fax 845-887-5386 (Callicoon)
845-794-7320 (Monticello)
published every Tuesday and Friday (twice-weekly)
letters to editor  –  Dan Hust editor@sc-democrat.com
calendar editor  — Tracy Swendsen calendar@sc-democrat.com

Times Herald Record — Middletown online edition
http://www.recordonline.com/services/lettertoeditor.html
The Record welcomes letters to the editor. They should be less than 150 words and contain constructive comment on issues of general interest. Letters may be edited or returned for length or bad taste.
Letters must be signed and contain an address and telephone number for verification. Anonymous letters will not be accepted. There is a limit of one letter per writer per month.
If you have a question about your letter, call 346-3142. You can e-mail letters to letters@th-record.com.
    REPORTERS
    Steve Israel     sisrael@th-record.com   “Town divided”
    Douglas Cunningham – "NYRI promises sound 2 good 2 B true"
    Brendan Scott bscott@th-record.com -
    "Federal rule could  short-circuit state on powerline project"

Utica  Observer-Dispatch (UticaOD Online)
Online form to submit letter to editor:
http://uticaod.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=NEWS0501
Editor Jon Broadbooks - 315-792-5004
JBROADBO1@utica.gannett.com
Editorial Page: 315-792-5006
    REPORTERS
    Elizabeth Cooper   ecooper@utica.gannett.com – 
    "Power rate impact would vary across state"

Wayne Independent (Honesdale, PA)
Write us at 210-8th St., Honesdale, Pa., 18431. Office hours are Monday-Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
E-mail address: twinews@wayneindependent.com .
Phone number: 570-253-3055

NATIONAL AND NYC PRESS

The New York Times
229 W 43rd St New York, NY 10036
•  LETTERS letters@nytimes.com.
•  OP-ED/EDITORIAL for info, call (212) 556-1831 or send article to oped@nytimes.com.
    editorial page editor, Gail Collins or Deputy Andrew Rosenthal : editorial@nytimes.com.
•  NEWS DEPARTMENT
    comments and suggestions (news coverage only) nytnews@nytimes.com
    or leave a message at 1-888-NYT-NEWS.
    Newsroom:  news-tips@nytimes.com;  bizday@nytimes.com;  

The New York Daily News Online
Letters: voicers@nydailynews.com
60 word limit.
Fax: 1-212 210-1505   
c/o Voice of the people
New York Daily news
450 W 33rd St
New York, NY 10001

The New York Post

letters@nypost.com

letters run aabout 75 words. 

This was lifted whole because it is just too good to cut. 

Evening Sun Letters to the Editor

Lessons learned from Marcy South

Monday, July 10th

Initial opposition to NYRI’s proposed power line through Central New York appears strikingly similar to the battle against Marcy-South 25 years ago. Unfortunately, this bodes well for NYRI’s proposal.

As the founder of PROTECT (Prudent Residents Opposed To Electrical Cable Transmission) which led a five year fight against Marcy-South, I’m afraid that our past mistakes are being repeated against NYRI. Let me offer some lessons learned the hard way, from our protracted struggle against the New York Power Authority and Marcy-South. Perhaps our heartbreaking loss may help those who are facing a remarkably similar challenge a generation later.

What we learned, sadly, is that the most valid and compelling arguments against such a power line are doomed to failure!

Here are the major ones:

Adverse Health Effects: Favorable studies will be presented to the PSC as evidence during the hearings “proving” that no long-term health problems are associated with high-tension power lines. (These are reminiscent of the tobacco industry’s studies “proving” the harmless effect of smoking).

Environmental Damage: The hearings will focus only on how to mitigate such damage (sleeker towers, earth-tone paint, etc.), not eliminate it. Diminished Property Values: More studies will be presented once again “proving” that fifteen story high-tension towers don’t detract from resale value (Guess who paid for these studies!).

Unrealistic Cost Savings: Economic arguments, however valid, fall on deaf ears. Marcy-South was touted as the deliverer of cheap power to downstate due to a sweetheart deal with Hydro-Quebec. It turned out that Hydro-Quebec priced this “cheap” power at 80% of oil-fired power, a cost-prohibitive last resort for most utilities. The Power Authority’s own numbers eventually revealed that oil had to reach $80/barrel (several hundred in today’s dollars) for the line to justify its cost to build. While the PSC admitted that it lacked a financial justification, it nevertheless approved Marcy-South due to its “added reliability”. (If all else fails, this ace-in-the-hole always wins).

So if our most legitimate arguments hold no sway with the PSC what about our local political leaders and high-powered lawyers? Surely they can stop this line. Don’t bet on it.

Local politicians will make lots of noise and hold all kinds of community meetings, but they will inevitably achieve very little. We were able to line up virtually every local politician against Marcy-South (county legislatures in five counties, all local state legislatures, and even then Lt. Governor Cuomo — it too was an election year so the commitments came fast and furious).

What we didn’t know was that these same politicians were also receiving campaign contributions and organizational support from the unions and companies that built the line.

High-powered lawyers seem like the right thing to do: “When in distress get a good lawyer!” We spent a small fortune on lawyers and the five counties did too. All to no avail. That’s because the PSC approval process is an endless sequence of hearings and the taking of “sworn testimony.”

The opposition will have swarms of lawyers, studies, expert witnesses and all the time and money it takes to get through thousands of hours of hearings. Your financial resources, no matter how impressive they may first seem, will eventually be tapped out long before the process ends.

Oh, there is one more thing to avoid doing: offering seemingly obvious alternatives like burying the power line, running it down the Thruway or using an existing right-of-way like March-South. This is exactly what NYRI is hoping you will do because they are easily refuted and divert attention away from what they don’t want you to do (more about this later).

Burying the power line seems so simple – after all, we do it into our homes at no great expense. But there is one simple reason this can’t be affordably done with high tension lines: electricity doesn’t run through the wires but through the air, hundreds of feet out from the wire creating an “electromagnetic field”. This is why you can hold up a fluorescent tube hear these lines and it will light as if you plugged it in (with no long-term health effects according to the power industry!).

Running the line down the Thruway also seems self-evident. But it will be summarily rejected by the PSC ostensibly because it would impair communications by the State Police, etc. The unstated reason is that the electromagnetic field would pose a serious health risk to those traveling or working on the Thruway (the environmental disaster also comes into play as millions people would see the monstrosity every year while mostly locals will see it as planned).

And proposing an existing r.o.w. like Marcy-South will only promote internecine warfare between regions which plays right into NYRI’s hands. Once the argument shifts to where the line should go it only validates its inevitability. Adding up these “lessons” seems quite grim and hopeless. That’s intentional; I don’t want to see NYRI walk all over upstaters like the Power Authority did.

So what’s left to do? My advice: “Follow the Money” (to borrow the advice from Watergate’s “Deep Throat”). Go after NYRI and expose then for what and who they are: an Enron style trading company that wants to “flip” cheaper power from upstate to downstate. As Enron demonstrated, the market for electricity can be temporarily cornered and manipulated during times of peak demand with only modest (and largely unprovable) withholding of supply.

During the ‘90s, California utilities showed a willingness to pay virtually any price to avoid brownouts and load shedding. This almost brought their state economy down and led the state to implement a comprehensive program of conservation and voluntary diminution of peak demand (no such plan is in effect for New York State). If this line gets built, NYRI will be able to buy out-of-state power that was previously available only to upstate New York and offer it to downstate utilities that will pay a far higher price for it (they won’t have to use their oil-fired power that costs even more).

This, in turn, will force upstate utilities to pay extortionate rates to meet peak demand. And no one can really predict what this could do to our electric costs.

However, we can get the slightest hint from the admission NYRI made in Norwich recently that upstaters will pay more than $150 million during the first year of the new line (they would not venture a prediction after the first year). If this company that won’t even admit who owns it feels compelled to throw out a staggering low-ball like this, just imagine what the real cost might be!

If a booming economy like California was threatened by energy extortion in the ‘90s, what could happen to our teetering upstate economy (Eliot Spitzer would have to change his description from Appalachia to Bangladesh).

Find out who is behind NYRI. Who are its investors? Are they prominent local citizens, foreigners, politicians? (Obviously, they are hiding their identities for a compelling reason).

What politicians are these secret investors connected to? (You can bet it’s a “Who’s Who” list).

So instead of hiring environmental lawyers, hire top-flight financial investigators to expose the truth.

Hire an experienced energy trader who understands this arcane business and can reveal the real consequences facing upstate utility costs. (Former Enron executives who are not in prison would be a good place to start).

Once all this information is made public, then local politicians will have no cover; they will be forced to choose between decimating what’s left of the upstate economy or supporting the discredited and exposed investors behind NYRI.

In short, NYRI must be stopped before the PSC hearings begin. They need to be shamed into withdrawing this proposal and dissolving their shell company.

Rod Torrence from Cooperstown

The following article is a a big deal in several ways.

1. Denying NYRI the power of eminent domain makes it harder for the corporation to site its powerline.

2. Banning eminent domain for all utility companies strenthens the "national interest" argument at the DOE/FERC and increases the likelihood that FERC will feel entitled to over-rule state laws. But FERC has made it clear that it reserves the right to overturn any state decision other than project approval, should its conjestion studies, due in August, indicate that we are in a "National Interest Electrical Transmission Corridor" NIETC — so we have little to lose by tying NYRI's hands.

3. Although the law passed the state senate and assembly, Pataki must sign the bill for it to become law. Under the circumstances, it would be a good idea to write him and urge him to approve it.

To Write To The Governor:
Governor George E. Pataki
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224

to e-mail

http://161.11.3.75/ 

From the 6/24/2006 Times Herald-Record

June 24, 2006

State Legislature blocks power line

By John Milgrim

Ottaway News Service

jmottaway@aol.com

Albany - State lawmakers dealt a major blow to the New York Regional Interconnect power line developers yesterday by blocking their ability to take private property along the route under the state's power of eminent domain.

The legislation is a major victory for communities along the proposed $1.6 billion transmission line, which would stretch from Orange County to the Mohawk Valley.

It could mean significant delays for the company. Some even believe the bill has the potential to kill the project altogether.

Until yesterday, it appeared the bill, authored by Sen. John Bonacic, R-C-Mount Hope, was destined to fail in the Assembly. A last-minute push gave it new life.

"Using eminent domain for a private, for-profit power line is a complete rip-off of our property owners," said Sen. James Seward, R-Otsego County, who also sponsored the bill. "We're saying the fat lady has sung, and NYRI is headed for a footnote in a book about how not to treat upstaters whose property and livelihoods are on the line."

NYRI, a privately owned electric transmission company with an Albany address and Canadian backers, would be forced to negotiate property purchases with individual landowners along the project's entire 190-mile route if Gov. George Pataki signs the bill.

They also could be forced to take their fight straight to Washington in what could be a years-long process seeking federal eminent domain powers under an obscure provision in last year's Energy Policy Act. If NYRI succeeds, it could bypass any opposition on the state level.

The vote yesterday wasn't without opposition. Groups of private utilities and the chairman of the Senate Energy Committee himself argued against the bill.

"It sends a very chilling message to anyone looking to invest in the energy field," said Sen. James Wright, R-Watertown. He argued that the federal government conceived its energy act specifically because of the opposition shown in the NYRI case.

"They are convinced we are incapable of achieving the (power) needs we actually have. We are demonstrating the need for federal intervention," Wright said.

The Independent Power Producers of New York, which represents private electricity generating and natural gas facilities, argued that Bonacic's bill opens the door for other project-specific legislation blocking any development that communities might oppose.

"Absent this (eminent domain) law, the state lacks a method to ensure that necessary infrastructure for the provision of reliable energy service can be established," the power producers said in a statement.

"We don't believe there's a need for this line," said Assemblyman Cliff Crouch, R-Guilford. "We don't believe upstate should suffer depreciation in property values for the benefit of downstate."

Orange County Executive Ed Diana jumped of the fence to oppose the 200-miles of power lines proposed by NYRI at a 900-person demonstration against the project in Otisville on the 22nd.

…according to the River Reporter June 22-28. 

The Neptune Project

Ed Stern, president of Neptune Regional Transmission System (RTS), LLC, developer of the Neptune undersea electric transmission project between New Jersey and Long Island, and Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) Chairman Richard Kessel met in New Cassel last month with elected officials from North Hempstead and Nassau County.

Stern discussed the status of a project in which a 660-megawatt, 65-mile electric underwater and underground direct-current line will be installed from New Jersey to New Cassel. He also reviewed the work being performed at 508 Duffy Avenue - the site of a new converter station needed to handle the power coming in from the cable. With one megawatt enough to support 1,000 average-size homes, the project will enable LIPA to provide power from New Jersey and the mid-Atlantic and southeastern states to 660,000 homes annually through the Neptune system by the end of 2007.

According to Stern, Neptune will pour foundation for the Duffy Avenue converter station in March or April with construction of the building and a substation yard taking place soon after. The first cables are scheduled to arrive from Italy in early July, said Stern, and will be laid in New Jersey and then, by the fall, on Long Island.

Currently, crews from the Island Park-based Hallen Construction Co. Inc. are digging the trenches needed to bury conduits along the Wantagh Parkway. "They are laying the conduit so when the cable comes, they will be able to pull it through in sections. "Over the course of the next nine months, all the conduits will be laid in," said Stern, adding that, in the water, the cable will be buried "four, five, six feet, depending on the location, under the sea bottom … here on land, it will be three or four feet."

According to Stern, "Once this plant is built all you are going to see is a nice looking facility. All the cables, whether at land or sea, will be buried the entire way. Nothing will be exposed, anywhere. No one will ever know that it is there."

The Duffy Avenue converter station is being constructed for the purpose of converting direct current (DC) electricity transported through the cable into alternating current (AC) electricity for distribution to Long Island customers. A second converter station, which is being built in Sayreville, NJ, will transform AC power into DC power for transmission to Long Island.

The power cable is a transmission connection to the Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland (PJM) system that will increase the capacity and energy available to Long Island in a more flexible and reliable manner than simply siting new generating facilities on Long Island. In addition, the cable will add capacity and make available more energy without adding local impacts associated with new power generation as well as make more energy available relatively quickly compared to the long process of siting and permitting new generation plants because the cable connects to existing resources.

"When we took over LILCO in 1998, Long Island was isolated from the rest of the grid. Now, between the cross sound cable (between Connecticut and Long Island) and this cable, we are now going to be part of the entire national grid," Kessel said. "This is kind of like an energy super highway where we can move electricity up and down the east coast with Long Island being the terminal. We are like two extension cord plugs - one on the north shore and now one on the south shore. That's why this is so important."

The project will provide LIPA with access to one of the richest and most diverse sources of low-cost electrical capacity and energy in the country. Neptune will give LIPA an off-island purchase point where it can purchase these products at prices that are heavily discounted compared with Long Island. . .

. . ."When this facility is finished and up and running two summers from now, it will have a significant impact on our customers' bills," said Kessel. "We believe that the wholesale price of electricity that we can import through the Neptune cable will help further stabilize electric bills on Long Island because we will be able to import power that does not come entirely from oil and gas, which right now is at record highs. . .This will be an incredible benefit to the people of Long Island once it is operational in 2007."

The transmission line will extend from Sayreville, NJ at the Raritan River, just off exit 9 of the New Jersey Turnpike, and travel some 51 miles beneath the New York Harbor and the Atlantic Ocean at a target depth of approximately four feet below the seabed. After making landfall south of Jones Beach, some 1,000 feet offshore of Jones Island, the cable will run under the Wantagh State Parkway some 14 miles before heading north and interconnecting with a converter station to be built on Duffy Avenue. From there, the cable will head back under the Wantagh to its final destination - a substation on Newbridge Road in Levittown where it will interconnect with the LIPA system.

In return for being granted the go-ahead to construct the converter station on North Hempstead Town property, Neptune has agreed to provide North Hempstead with funding in the amount of some $10 million, which will be used to build a state-of-the-art community center in New Cassel. Neptune will pay the town $10 million over the course of 12 years, beginning in 2007. Through the IDA's PILOT program, the Westbury School District will receive additional funding over the course of Neptune's 20-year contract with LIPA.

Of Neptune's agreement to help construct the community center, Supervisor Jon Kaiman said, "From the Town of North Hempstead's prospective this is an important project on a number of levels. We are thankful that we were able to find and be a partner with a company that has made a commitment, not only to Long Island's future, but to the local community's future as well. That outlook and approach is critical to the people in the community who will be hosting this facility. We look forward to a very positive relationship."

Councilman Robert Troiano added, "This is a great example and model for how government, the private sector and the community can work together for the benefit of all. We are very happy to have New Cassel be a part of what is the most important project in Long Island's energy history in exchange for what is a very valuable community asset. This is a case in which we have all been able to work together so that, in exchange for hosting this project we get a multi-million dollar, multi-purpose center that will revitalize the entire community."

For more information about the underwater, underground direct-current line or the construction of the converter stations, visit lipower.org and neptunerts.com.

Sullivan County Legislature Chairman Chris Cunningham was chosen to head the newly formed anti-power line group Communities Against Regional Interconnects (CARI), a group of county pols repping all eight counties targetted by the NYRI power lines, plus citizens' groups: STOP NYRI, The Upstate Citizens' Alliance and the UDC. 

The first meet was in Albany, June 20th

Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno came out against the NYRI project as well, saying that it was harmful to the environment, the economy and the careeer of any upstate politician who stood in its way.

1. Is it transferable to a power line?

Rich's right-of-way is based on several questionable premises. One is that the railroad is "an established electrical right-of-way." The electrical transmision along the railway was intended for trains only — it wasn't a consumer delivery system. You may let people drive down a street, but it doesn't mean that they have the right to use it as a drag strip.

2. Is it temporary?

Similarly, the railroad right-of-way in many areas is  contingent on its being used specifically for rail traffic. It reverts to owners when the railroad stops running.

And as Detective Columo might say: 

One more question… Rich has already extorted huge tax abatements from the IDAs along his route by threatening to close the RR. What will he want when the state' selectrical grid depends on tax-payers subsidizing his deficit-run company?

…based on assorted sources, including notes from NYRI meetings –New Windsor and Callicoon, plus UDPC's Hancock meeting:  

What would these power lines be like? 

The Towers:

Pipeline route: 83’ high scaffold-like towers

River route  130’-180’ high monopoles  – taller than the statue of Liberty.

The point is: well above the tree line and visible for many miles.

The Cables:

The cables are made of steel with aluminum cladding. They are uninsulated, but rest on insulated supports. This does not mean, though, that eagles would fry if they sat on them. The cables won’t be “live” that way. They will, however, emit massive EMFs, although perhaps less than an AC line of comparable power would.

Each main cable would carry 400,000V and 1.2 billion watts. There will be at least 2 cables on each pole or tower, plus a return.  On the monopoles, there would be room for 2 more cables.

Noise:

A lot.. . .approximately 40-50dB, or roughly half the volume of a passing train. The noise is intermittent. It can be a hum or a buzz.

Safety:

If a cable fell, it would shut off in 1/3 of a second – but still be the equivalent of 40-60 

lightning strikes. In the river that could be quite a fish-fry; or near a gas leak. . .

NYRI claims that there are no known instances of a DC cable blowing down in a hurricane or a tornado, but the UDPC’s Troy Bystrum says that there is a case of strong winds causing cables to PULL a tower down.

We asked a NYRI rep at one meeting what would happen if a train derailed and hit a pole. He said that it wouldn’t happen, because “trains don’t go very far off the tracks when they derail.” This is news to anyone who saw pictures of any of Norfolk-Southern’s recent derailments. The NYRI rep also said that derailments were “rare” – but there was one just this year on the NS line and one May 30^th on the NY Susquehanna & Western.

There may be some danger posed to the metal in a pipeline if it is in close proximity to HVDC cables. The electromagnetic fields (EMFs) might corrode the pipe from within. 

The debate about a link between EMFs and cancer still rages, although statistical evidence is mounting for a link to childhood leukemia, and EMFs are known to damage pacemakers. Some scientists believe that the fields will disorient birds that navigate via magnetic fields, and possibly sterilize eagles.

The Right-of-Way

Along the pipeline route, the right-of-way would add 50’ to the pipeline right-of-way.

Along the river route, the power lines would need a right-of-way of 150’, adding at least 50’ to current maximum.

NYRI has about 1/8 mi. “wiggle room” off the current right-of-way when placing poles.

The Bases /Footings

The bases of the river poles would be 6’ and the cement footing 8’ square by 16-17 feet high. The disruption of animal habitat by the installation of the bases is a concern. 

Distance Between Poles

From 200’ to 800’

Disassembly:

There is currently no plan for removing – or paying to remove – the proposed towers if they become obsolete or economically unviable. NYRI says it will use no public money, but it should add: “Yet!”

What About Property Values?

NYRI has claimed more than once that living under a power line has no effect on property values. But the evidence tells a different story. Overall, property values on homes within sight of power lines can be expected to fall from 10-50% — with the more expensive properties depreciating at the higher rate.

Is This Thing Really Needed?

It depends whom you ask. The NYISO thinks it is. Or will be in ten years, 5 years after NYRI is promising to deliver. Unfortunately, the NYISO estimates are the ones that the NYPSC uses to make decisions. So, you can tell them that reduced-use or new efficiency tech is the bet to make – and in five years they might agree with you, but today, they won’t believe you.

But even if massive power lines ARE “in the public interest” or “the national interest” as NYRI claims, they sure don’t belong on either of NYRI’s federally protected routes, or under its dodgy, evasive, anti-public corporate leadership.   

Destroying the Delaware Valley to feed SENY development is like burning the furniture to warm the slipcovers.  (SENY is what they call South Eastern New York.)

THE COMPANY

NYRI — New York Regional Interconnection Inc. www.nyri.us is a privately financed corporation, meaning that it issues no public stock or annual report and is opaque to watchdogs.

NYRIP—New York Regional Interconnection Project — NYRI’s plan to traverse NY State with a 200-mile power line — either along the railroad right-of-way, which it thinks it owns, or along the Millennium Gas Pipe line right of way, which it knows it doesn’t own.

ACI — American Consumer Industries —(Wilmington, DE) founded 1984 — the holding company that owns 50% of Colmac, NYRI Inc (also Wilmington), that in turn owns 100% of NYRI (Albany) (www.aciinc.net). It’s parent company is Canadian.

THE PROCESS

DOE — Department of Energy — www.energy.gov/

NIETC — National Interest Electrical Transmission Corridor — NYRI applied to the DOE for an “early designation as a NIETC” covering the railroad route.

NYPS — New York Public Service Commission (also PSC). ( http://www.dps.state.ny.us/articlevii.htm )The state agency that can grant a privately owned company permission under Article VII, section No.1221, to erect power lines and seize private land. If the PSC can’t decide what to do after one year…

FERC — The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission— Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, FERC can choose a route within a designated corridor (a NIETC) and declare eminent domain. Lawyers at FERC are often hired by Bracewell & Giuliani, (Yes! Rudy Giuliani) as a reward for good work at the FERC.

NERC — North American Electric Reliability Council — NERC's mission is to ensure that the bulk electric system in North America is reliable, adequate and secure. www.nerc.com

ERO — — A U.S. self-regulatory body that spans North America, with FERC oversight. It assures that NERC standards are met by Canadian authorities as well.

NYISO — New York State Independent System OperatorsThe people responsible for running New York State's grid.

THE TECHNOLOGY

HVDC — High voltage, direct current — NYRI’s cables will carry 400,000 volts each. There will be two per tower. Direct current, as distinct from AC, (alternating current) uses less energy than AC to carry electricity over long distances.

RIVER MANAGEMENT AND DEFENSE

NPS — National Park Service —www.nps.gov/ Is partnered with the UDC and others to implement the Wild and Scenic River Act (see below).

DRBC — Delaware River Basin Commission — http://www.state.nj.us/drbc Monitors flows and releases that maintain river’s health.

NYSDEC — NY State Department of Environmental Conservationwww.dec.state.ny.us/

UDC — Upper Delaware Council the Upper Delaware Council, Inc. is the oversight body responsible for the coordinated implementation of the River Management Plan for the Scenic and Recreational River, a component since 1978 of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Sysstem.

FUDR — Friends of the Upper Delaware River, the last wild fishery in the east. http://www.fudr.org/

UDPC — The Upper Delaware Preservation Coalition — Based in Narrowsburg, NY. It is a non-profit organization actively opposing the NYRIP and is the go-to-place for information and action updates. www.udpc.net Stop the Powerlines strongly recommends that you donate to their efforts and legal fund at www.updc.net/donate.html