NO on SB 1020 (Formerly LC 85)

SB 1020 would fast track the state permitting process for utility companies to apply for wetland removal-fill permits on private land before getting approval from landowners. This Senate Bill, a rewritten LC-85 bill, is the resurrected House Bill HB 3058 from last year that we worked hard to defeat.

This change to Oregon law has been sought by Texas based NorthernStar Natural Gas Company, which wants to build the Bradwood Landing LNG terminal and the Palomar pipeline across the Mt. Hood National Forest and dozens of small farms, woodlots, rivers and streams. It would apply to other utilities as well.

Currently, Idaho Power Company has made applications for Removal Fill Permits along existing electrical lines in Malheur County. While it may be in accordance with state law to have permits on the books where utilities already exist, it is worrisome that Removal Fill Permits might gain additional status with the passage of SB1020/LC 85.

Please write/call/email your legislator to vote against this bill!

Possible letter:

Dear [Decision Maker],
I am writing to call your attention to SB 1020 (formerly LC 85), legislation introduced by the Senate Business and Transportation Committee. This legislation would threaten Oregon's farms, forests and rivers by fast-tracking state issued removal-fill permits for utility companies.

I urge you to express your opposition to SB 1020 during the February session. At the very least, please do not allow utility companies to fast track across private land without the permission of the landowner.

Oregon coal plant with Idaho Power stake will be phased out

by Rocky Barker 01/18/2010 http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2010/01/18/rockybarker/oregon_coal_plant_idaho_power_stake_will_be_phased_out

Portland General Electric’s surprise decision last week to shut down its Boardman coal-fired electric generation plant means that Idaho Power will be reducing its coal base load sooner than expected.

The Oregon utility was going to have to invest $500 to $700 million in new pollution controls to keep the plant operating. Since Idaho Power has a 10 percent stake in the plant that meant that Idaho’s customers would have had to pony up from $50 to $70 million for its stake.

Idaho Power now will have to find the 50 megawatts of power somewhere else. But its not as bad as it sounds. Getting rid of Boardman opens up transmission capacity to access more of the federal hydropower and wind power to the west when it is available at a good price.

Idaho Power already has gotten approval to build a natural gas plant in the lower Treasure Valley that will provide power that can offset some of the 50 megawatts. And Idaho Power already has become more aggressive at pushing energy efficiency programs that can reduce the demand and cost of power.

The investment in the Boardman retrofit might have appeared attractive in the short run. But as we are forced to pay the price of carbon, which seems inevitable, that investment would have lost its luster.

PGE plans to decommission the Boardman coal plant by 2020, the Oregonian reports, giving the region and Idaho Power time to make the transition. The downside for Idaho ratepayers is that they will be left with more than $12 million in amortized investment in the plant.

That means Idaho Power will have to write it off over 10 years instead of 30, which will cost ratepayers some money.

Delayed Interest in B2H?

From page 124 of Idaho Power's 2009 Draft Integrated Resource Plan:

"Delayed interest in the Boardman to Hemingway project may result in Idaho Power constructing both a replacement generation resource as well as constructing the transmission line at a later date.

"The alternate resource portfolio may lead to constructing the Boardman to Hemingway project in the second 10-year period. Idaho Power will review the status of the Boardman to Hemingway project in the 2011 IRP. . . "

Idaho Power Files 2009 Integrated Resource Plan

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/idaho-power-files-2009-integrated-resource-plan-80742467.html

Collaborative Process Produces Plan for Responsible, Secure Energy Future

BOISE, Idaho, Jan. 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --

IDACORP, Inc. (NYSE: IDA) principal subsidiary Idaho Power last week filed the 2009 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) developed through a collaborative planning process connecting Idaho Power resource and planning experts and government, customer, public and environmental organization stakeholders, with the Public Utilities Commissions in both Idaho and Oregon.

"We continually plan for the future, taking steps to best position Idaho Power to meet projected resource requirements and anticipated regulation while minimizing the impact to our customers and owners," said Mark Stokes, Idaho Power's power supply planning manager. "This is about doing the right thing for our customers and the ongoing financial strength and stability of our company. Our collaborative IRP process guides us in that respect. The 2009 IRP planning process incorporated additional considerations in light of anticipated regulation, public perception and direct communication with owners, customers and employees."

The 2009 IRP addresses available supply-side and demand-side resource options, planning period load forecasts, potential resource portfolios, a risk analysis and near-term and long-term action plans. The 2009 IRP is available at http://www.idahopower.com/AboutUs/PlanningForFuture/irp/2009/ .

Idaho Power will schedule public presentations regarding the 2009 IRP in multiple communities across the company's eastern Oregon and southern Idaho service area in early 2010. Once confirmed, the public presentation schedule will be posted on Idaho Power's IRP Web page.

"Our collaborative IRP process is the proper forum to plan for a balanced resource portfolio to minimize risk, ensure reliability and consider cost and regulatory obligations," said Stokes. "We see this process as a continuous commitment, and by regularly updating the IRP, we are able to account for changes in service area growth and regulatory requirements."

FERC can't overturn states' transmission rejections

http://www.pennenergyequipment.com/article/display.html?id=372537

20 January 2010-- The Supreme Court on Jan. 19 let stand a lower court ruling that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) cannot approve a transmission line that a state rejected.

In Edison Electric Institute et al. v. Piedmont Environmental Council et al., the Supreme Court declined to review the ruling and did not give a comment. . .

Also see " ELECTRICITY: Supreme Court dashes hopes of backers of federal transmission siting" at http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=25148&docId=l:1111606135&isRss=true

Renewable Energy Summit

http://greenenergy.tvcc.cc/

Treasure Valley Community College and Sunergy World will be hosting a Renewable Energy Summit February 18-19 at the Four Rivers Cultural Center in Ontario, Oregon.

Focus Topics include:

• New economic incentives for renewable energy in the Northwest
• New business opportunities and the potential workforce development challenges
• Impacts of new technologies on residential and commercial-scale solar energy and biomass systems
• New renewable curriculum and career paths available at TVCC

Who should attend:

• State and local government officials
• Ranchers and farmers
• Business and homeowners
• Members of financial institutions
• Builders, developers, and code officials
• Economic development professionals
• Community members
• Students interested in new careers

Scheduled speakers:

DON HOLLIS , USDA Energy Grants

DIANE HENKELS, Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC)

STEPHANIE PAGE, Ag Energy Opportunity In Oregon

MARK STOKES, Idaho Power

SUNERGY WORLD, Solar Designs and Installations

STOEL RIVES, LLP, Legal Implications of Renewable Energy

JIM KLEINBURD, Carbon Credits/REC's

KURT CHRISTENSEN, Renewable Ag Energy

ROGER FINDLEY, TVCC, Educational Opportunities

STEVE NORBERG, OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY, Soybeans as Biofuel

Turmoil in Power Sector

Falling Electricity Demand Trips Up Utilities' Plans for Infrastructure Projects

by Rebecca Smith Jan 14, 2010 The Wall Street Journal

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704675104575001322373417024.html

Falling U.S. electricity production in the past two years is frustrating the utility industry and shaking up timetables for some major infrastructure projects.

Electricity output decreased 3.7% last year, the steepest drop since 1938, according to federal statistics, following a nearly 1% decline in 2008. . .

The falling electricity demand and production are attributed to a weak economy, conservation efforts and, in 2009, a relatively mild summer in many parts of the country. . .

Government energy experts believe a strengthening economy will lift electricity production this year, but don't foresee a return to prerecession levels anytime soon. The Energy Information Administration expects industrial demand for electricity to increase 2.2% this year and 2.5% in 2011, which suggests a return to prerecession levels by 2013. . .

Mark Griffith, managing director of Black & Veatch, said utilities may be forced to defer infrastructure projects that weren't critically needed in light of the recent weak demand. . .

Idaho Power plans to resubmit proposed transmission line route

by Larry Meyer Argus Observer Jan 15 2010 http://argusobserver.com/articles/2010/01/15/news/doc4b50ab941d738624705900.txt

ONTARIO — According to its schedule, Idaho Power Company plans to resubmit a proposed route for its planned 500-kilovolt transmission line from Boardman to a substation near Melba.

Idaho Power, however, said there is no specific date for the company to name its most favored route as it plans to allow the public advisory teams to continue their work toward a recommended route.

“Our contingent feels it would be better if (people from) each county would draw lines through their county,” Patty Kennington, one of the leaders in Stop Idaho Power, said. . .

Initial routes drawn by members of the public and project advisory team members went under technical review and were refined to improve their ability to gain permits.

The task was narrowing down the more than 40 suggested routes drawn out during a series of public mapping sessions last fall. The refined routes will be up for public review in the near future.

In addition to the counties originally brought into the route selection process including Malheur, Baker, Union, Umatilla and Morrow counties, Harney and Grant counties have been included since some of the proposed routes go through those counties as well.

A third round of advisory team meetings has been scheduled in those counties, one in Grant County, Tuesday from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. (PST) at the Canyon City Community Hall, and Harney County, 4 p.m. to 9 p.m., at the county Community Center in Burns. . .

Take Action Now to Stop Wetland Fill Permits LC 85 (AGAIN)

This from Brett VandenHeuvel, bv@columbiariverkeeper.org :

We’ve confirmed that a new version of 3058 is rearing its ugly head during the short legislative session this January. Senator (Rick) Metsger (Hood River, Troutdale) is introducing what seems to be an almost identical bill that would allow a corporation to apply for wetland fill permits on private property without the landowners’ permission. This will fast track utility projects.

Could you put the word out to folks that this harmful bill is back. The short session is very short so we need to start contacting legislators now.

Details on what is proposed, from http://rogueimc.org/en/2010/01/15729.shtml

Senator Metsger is proposing this bill to change the definition of “applicant” for wetland fill permits. That change would allow agents other than a landowner or person working on the landowner's behalf to apply for permits to develop on private property. The bill appears to be intended to facilitate public roadways, but it is not limited to public projects and would in fact allow anyone to apply for and receive a permit on private land without the landowner's permission. This bill would be more acceptable if it only affected public projects like roads. . . .

"LC 85" will be considered during a work session in the Senate Business and Transportation Committee on Wednesday, January 13th @ 1pm in Hearing Room F at the Oregon State Capitol.

We must impress upon the legislature that this is a controversial bill that shouldn't be considered in a special session designed to remedy the budget crisis in Oregon. We also need to tell them that it is wrong to treat private LNG speculation in the same manner as public projects like roads and sewer lines. Contacting the legislators below is absolutely critical to our success in defeating this bill again.

When you contact these decision makers, tell them:
1) You oppose any bill that would fast-track the permitting process for LNG-related pipelines.
2) LC 85 would be a controversial bill that did not pass in the 2009 session, as HB 3058, and shouldn't be considered during the special session.
3) At the very least, Senator Metsger's transportation bill, LC 85, needs to be amended to exclude projects by private corporations.

Contact our legislators:

Ted Ferrioli

sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us

Cliff Bentz

rep.cliffbentz@state.or.us

Refined CAP routes: County by county

Click for a larger map

Idaho Power's hired technical and environmental experts, Tetra Tech, have refined the original CAP maps to reflect exclusionary constraints. The map for Malheur County and western Idaho counties appears above. The line traversing virtually the same "red" route across Malheur County EFU ground, that originally sparked SIP's opposition, was drawn by Marsing's mayor in an attempt to utilize what was mistaken as a federal utility corridor.

Since Idaho Power did not require Idaho counties to draw their own routes, the "concept" route through Payette and Canyon County was drawn by a member of SIP. (The other Idaho route was drawn by the environmental group ONDA.) County by county input is essential to make use of local expertise and to avoid the resentment that comes when those outside the local area impose their ideas, something which Idaho Power is now careful to avoid--with the exception of the Oregon-Idaho South team. This situation now needs to be rectified.

Idaho Power has expected local routes to be drawn by Oregon counties, including the recently-added Grant county team. The CAP process would gain even-handed fairness if Idaho citizens were to draw a route or routes through their own counties.

Additional maps can be found at the B2H website:

http://www.boardmantohemingway.com/idaho_power_CAP_maps.aspx

Energy conservation helps stymie a major transmission line

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/01/06/06climatewire-energy-conservation-helps-stymie-a-major-tra-71702.html?pagewanted=1 by Peter Behr of ClimateWire

Transmission projects have traditionally come under attack by environmental, scenic and "not in my backyard" partisans. Now a major mid-Atlantic power line proposal may be held up instead by a weak economy and a growing energy conservation movement.

A Virginia regulatory examiner plans this week to rule on a request by PATH Allegheny Virginia Transmission Corp. to withdraw its proposal to build a 276-mile, $1.8 billion high-voltage transmission line from West Virginia through Virginia's northwest corner to a proposed substation near Frederick, Md. The project would be resubmitted this fall, its backers say. . .

The new planning scenarios "suggest that the PATH Project appears not to be needed in 2014," said Steven Herling, PJM's vice president for planning, in a Dec. 28 letter to the project's developers, American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy Inc...

"Clearly, the big impact of the delay [in last spring's forecast] related to the economy," Herling said in an interview. "The analysis we did at the beginning of 2009 was based on load forecast that included the recession. That pushed the line to 2014." Last month's analysis added demand response, and that showed that the line was no longer required in 2014. "Demand response is having a significant effect," Herling said. . .

"We knew the economy was lousy last spring. We knew these efficiency measures were in place. They have been ignoring the facts right along," said Malcolm Baldwin, who owns a farm in Lovettsville in Loudoun County, Va., and is a board member of the Piedmont Environmental Council. The council opposes the PATH project and a second major project, the TRAIL power line that is now under construction from West Virginia to Northern Virginia.

PJM's new preliminary analysis indicates that because of reduced demand, key high-voltage power lines into Maryland and northern Virginia aren't threatened with overloading until 2021 or later, based on assessments of how much power they can safely carry. Herling said reliability limits on voltages, however, could be reached in the region as early as 2016. . .

Idaho Power tweaks plans

http://www.bluemountaineagle.com/Main.asp?SectionID=1&ArticleID=22658

12/16/2009 by Scott Callister

BOISE - Idaho Power is tweaking its routes as planning proceeds for development of a new 500-kilovolt transmission line between Hemingway, Idaho, and Boardman, in northeastern Oregon.

Kent McCarthy, community advisory process leader for the project, said last week that new maps reflecting the latest changes will be posted on the Boardman to Hemingway (B2H) website as soon as possible. . .

Idaho Power dropped its easternmost route, which would would have looped north from Hemingway through Idaho, into Washington state and then southwest to Boardman. The line was one of the longest, but McCarthy said the rationale for deleting it wasn't keyed on the distance but on the potential conflicts with a separate project already in the works to serve Idaho's Treasure Valley.

The utility still has about 42 routes or route segments set for further review, McCarthy said. . .

The I-84 routes drew intense opposition from residents in Baker and Malheur counties, but they are still under consideration, he said. Residents in Grant County have been vocal in support of putting the line along I-84. . .

Idaho Power hopes to have its route analysis completed by sometime in January and to forward recommendations in February to the Bureau of Land Management, the lead public agency for the project. The BLM will conduct the National Environmental Policy Act review, which also will include a public comment process, and make the final decision on the route.

Idaho Power hopes to begin construction of the line in 2013.

The utility is still accepting public comment on the routes.