EC August 2008

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

12 participants
60 discussions

WVSC Coal Film Festival info
by Jim Sconyers 26 Aug '08

26 Aug '08

Attached is information about the Coal Film Festival dates and places. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

WVSC committee chairs
by Jim Sconyers 26 Aug '08

26 Aug '08

Here are some new or renewed WV Sierra Club chairfolks: Chapter Chair - Jim Sconyers Political Committee Chair - Regina Hendrix Nominating Committee Chair - Jonathan Rosenbaum Election Committee - Mary Davis, Jim Kotcon Energy Committee Chair - Jim Kotcon Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fw: GOOD NEWS on PA Transmission line case
by aaron.isherwood＠sierraclub.org 25 Aug '08

25 Aug '08

Fyi... Aaron Isherwood Senior Staff Attorney Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 85 Second Street, 2d Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-3441 Phone: (415) 977-5680 Fax: (415) 977-5793 CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION/WORK PRODUCT This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or attorney work product. If you receive this e-mail inadvertently, please reply to the sender and delete all versions on your system. Thank you. ----- Forwarded by Aaron Isherwood/Sierraclub on 08/25/2008 11:02 AM ----- Jeff Schmidt <jeff.schmidt(a)sierraclub.org> 08/25/2008 09:27 AM Please respond to Jeff Schmidt <jeff.schmidt(a)sierraclub.org> To Glen Besa <glen.besa(a)sierraclub.org>, Aaron Isherwood <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> cc jeff tittel <jeff.tittel(a)sierraclub.org> Subject GOOD NEWS on PA Transmission line case This might be useful to share with whomever at national Sierra Club is working on NIETC / transmission line issues Jeff Schmidt ----- Original Message ----- From: Ginny Kreitler To: listserve Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 10:54 PM Subject: [Pa-transmission] GOOD NEWS for conservation in the PA recommendation on TrAILCO For those of you who have not read through the 364 pages (!) of the recommendation against TrAILCo in Pennsylvania last week, there is much to cheer. The Administrative Law Judges stand reinforced exactly several of the points the conservation community has been articulating. Namely: 1) "Economics, not reliability, is the impetus for both the original request for transmission proposals from PJM and the TrAIL proposal itself" [p112] 2) "The origianl TrAIL project was proposed before any reliability criteria infractions were identified" [p113] 3) "Project Mountaineer's goal was to transmist 5000 megawatts of new coal-fired generation from western to eastern PJM" and "According to Mr. Pfirrmann [PJM management in testimony to FERC], at least two extra high-voltage transmission lines were required to support the delivery of this much electricity." [p 113] 4) "The RTEP modeling process used by PJM is an overly conservative, belt and suspenders approach to transmission planning" [ok we never asserted that], and 5) "We conclude that the RTEP process is designed to yield transmission solutions." [p.115] In short, the conceptual foundation of the Mid-Atlantic corridor as well as the case for this project are flawed and the pro-transmission arguments were developed to expand coal-fired power markets. These conclusions deserve widespread attention and should be disseminated to constituents, media, and legislators. Also very noteworthy is the seriousness of the Pennsylvania review process. Of particular note is the weight given to the importance of environmental impacts analysis in the application and review process. The Administrative Law Judges made plain their perspectives on what constitutes (or, more precisely, what does not) a reasonable effort to affirmatively and completely address environmental impacts. This position not only proves that the Judges are taking seriously their responsibility in the area of assessing the environmental impacts of proposed projects, it also provides some guidance for future cases for those concerned with environmental impacts of other proposed projects. The decision considerations should be equally relevant in those cases. In this ruling the ALJs faulted the incompleteness of the information developed on environmental impacts, in particular suggesting that better information is expected in: 1) documenting the resources affected 2) presenting a soil and sedimentation plan 3) identifying locations of access roads 4) detailing steps to be taken to protect ground and surface waters 5) detailing a plan to minimize air and water pollution from construction, and, with special emphasis on 6) providing a credible account of how alternative routes were seriously considered that had less environmental impacts than the 'preordained' route [their words] The full recommendation can be found at: http://www.puc.state.pa.us/PCDOCS/1019983.pdf. Again, please note that PALTA's site lists the environmental considerations to be detailed in transmission project filings. See: http://conserveland.org/pp/Transmission/opposepowerline Pennsylvania's state process is superior. Interested stakeholders should familiarize themselves with it. All parties concerned with responsible land use decisions and infrastructure siting should be concerned over the possibility of this state jurisdiction being usurped for an ill-defined and untested new federal process. This is a highly important precedent being set for our Commonwealth and for others.

1 0

[Fwd: Fwd: Sunday 8.24.2008 WV_1+2]
by Regina Hendrix 24 Aug '08

24 Aug '08

More info on the Marcellus Shale drilling controversy in Pendleton County. Watch out, dirty Mike Ross is involved. Regina

1 0

[Fwd: possible ammo for power line fight]
by Regina Hendrix 24 Aug '08

24 Aug '08

Wanted to be sure you got this. Regina

1 0

[Fwd: Fwd: New PA Water / Permit Process]
by Regina Hendrix 24 Aug '08

24 Aug '08

FYI.

1 0

PA DECISION AGAINST TRAILCO - 18 MEG
by William DePaulo via YouSendIt 22 Aug '08

22 Aug '08

You have a priority delivery from YouSendIt 364 PAGES OF "JUST SAYING NO" TO TRAILCO Click here to download file: https://rcpt.yousendit.com/599707339/3560ef5a9849a702f9296bcc2ec5bc71 Sent by: william.depaulo(a)gmail.com File to pick up: 1019983.pdf File will remain active for: 14 Days File too big for email? Try at http://www.yousendit.com YouSendIt Inc. : http://www.yousendit.com Terms of Service: http://www.yousendit.com/cms/termsofservice Privacy Policy : http://www.yousendit.com/cms/privacypolicy DMCA Policy: http://www.yousendit.com/cms/dmca Opt Out: http://www.yousendit.com/blocking.php?action=optout&email=EC@osenergy.org&k…

1 0

Re: [EC] Fw: TrailCo NMF revised
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 21 Aug '08

21 Aug '08

Holly Both FOIA requests were filed under the state FOIA which is almost a verbatim reproduction of the federal statute. In short, we do not have an option to sue anywhere except in state court. PSC - requested all documents pertaining to the April 15, 2008 Joint Stipulation -- the document in which PSC Staff withdrew its opposition in exchange for a laundry list of financial and other incentives. PSC Staff produced all documents (1100+) responsive to request, as did CAD (700+). The Commissioners produced a relatively small number of documents and issued a Vaughn index for the balance. Without seeing the docs it is impossible to assess whether the exemptions asserted -- deliberative privilege for internal communications -- is validly asserted. GOVERNOR - requested ALL documents pertaining to TrAILCo proposal, not merely those relating to April 15 Joint Stip. Governor produced 1100+ documents, most relating to tax he wants to impose on the transmission line if and when built. Importantly, the Gov office refused to produce a Vaughn index. Without such an index they cannot sustain their burden of proof, as all documents are presumed non-exempt unless and until an exemption is asserted and substantiated by an index. PSC Appeal -- far and away the biggest matter the PSC did not address was CO2 emissions. The PSC took the position that the proposed transmission line was "electron neutral," i.e., that the line didn't "know" where the moving electron originated. That, of course, is technically true. In West Virginia it is also totally specious because 97% of the state's electric energy is generated from coal. And the PSC's August 1 order itself relied on the economic justification associated with 4 billion dollars of construction costs for four (4) new IGCC coal plants now on the drawing boards. The PSC also totally ignored the fact that all of the purported economic benefits associated with the increased use of coal will be converted to economic leg weights when the impact of a now certain cap and trade system (or carbon tax of some sort) is adopted next year. I want to emphasize that we don't have any slack time on the appeal or preparation for PATH. TrAILCo's transcript is 3,000 pages long. I lived thru it live but I still need to serve up the case to the Supreme Court, because the PSC has intentionally buried all of the evidence in a 183-page behemoth of a decision issued on August 1. We need to go now. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Bill On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 1:40 PM, <Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org> wrote: > > Thanks, Bill. I will need some more information regarding the FOIA > appeals. For example, what did you request and what did you receive and > what was witheld (or can you even tell what was witheld)? Did the agencies > assert any privileges or exemptions? If so, were they lawfully invoked or > do you believe the exemptions are being abused. Are we actually bringing > suit under FOIA, or the state's public records law. If it is FOIA, wouldn't > you want to file in federal court? As for the appeal of the PSC's decision, > you make note that the environmental impacts were not properly considered. > Could you elaborate? What was considered, what was not, and what law are > you relying on? > > Jim, at this point, I am still investigating the legal claims (as you can > see above). I didn't get the sense that we needed immediate approval since > the PSC's decision is not even final yet, and when it becomes final, we have > 30 days. If there is a reason to file sooner, please let me know. It is my > understanding that you are going to be talking with Aaron Isherwood about > how the National Coal Campaign may be able to help with this and the PATH > transmission line. I'll follow up with him if it impacts the Supreme Court > appeal and/or the FOIA appeals. Thanks to you both, > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > > > *"William V. DePaulo, Esq." <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>* > > 08/21/2008 10:01 AM > To > Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org cc > "Jim Sconyers" <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> > Subject > Re: Fw: TrailCo NMF revised > > > > > Holly > > Here is a revised NMF which I hope is responsive to your requests. Please > let me know if you have any additional questions or topics you'd like > fleshed out in more detail. > > All the best, > > Bill > > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 3:43 PM, <*Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org*<Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org>> > wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > Jim has attached the new matter form and I'm hoping you can supplement it > with our legal strategy. I'm confused about the FOIA appeals and the > Supreme Court appeal so I was hoping you could separate everything and give > me a clear description of the legal claims. If you are anticipating actual > FOIA lawsuits in conjunction with all of this let me know, it may make sense > to do one authorization for all the legal challenges. Thanks, > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > ----- Forwarded by Holly Bressett/Sierraclub on 08/20/2008 11:51 AM ----- > *Jim Sconyers <**jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>*>* > > 08/14/2008 07:41 AM > > To > Holly Bressett <*holly.bressett(a)sierraclub.org*<holly.bressett(a)sierraclub.org> > > cc > aaron isherwood <*aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org*<aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> > > Subject > TrailCo NMF revised > > > > > > > Here is a revised version of our TrailCo powerline NMF. It still needs to > go to our ExCom for certain approval. > > Jim Sconyers* > **jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> > 603.969.6712 > > Remember: Mother Nature bats last. > > > > > -- > William V. DePaulo, Esq. > 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 > Charleston, WV 25301-2163 > Tel: 304-342-5588 > Fax: 304-342-5505* > **william.depaulo(a)gmail.com* <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>* > **www.passeggiata.com* <http://www.passeggiata.com/> > -- William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel: 304-342-5588 Fax: 304-342-5505 william.depaulo(a)gmail.com www.passeggiata.com

1 0

Re: [EC] TrailCo PATH NIETC conf call
by Jim Sconyers 21 Aug '08

21 Aug '08

OK - 6:00 PM tomorrow. Jim K, does that work for you? Aaron - can you set up the conference call and reply-all with call-in info, please? Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: "aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org" <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> To: Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:37:36 PM Subject: Re: TrailCo PATH NIETC conf call 6 or 7 pm ET tomorrow would work for me. Shall we say 6 pm ET? Aaron Isherwood Senior Staff Attorney Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 85 Second Street, 2d Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-3441 Phone: (415) 977-5680 Fax: (415) 977-5793 CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION/WORK PRODUCT This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or attorney work product. If you receive this e-mail inadvertently, please reply to the sender and delete all versions on your system. Thank you. Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> 08/20/2008 01:32 PM To aaron isherwood <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> cc Subject TrailCo PATH NIETC conf call Hi Aaron - So far we have 3 votes for tomorrow evening, none for anything else. Does that work for you? The replies are from the folks who are currently involved - me, im Kotcon, and Bill DePaulo. If OK, pick a time - Jim K said evening, which would be your late afternoon. As soon as we know, I can send the call in info to all who may be interested. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

3 3

Fw: Friday meeting
by Jim Sconyers 21 Aug '08

21 Aug '08

another route to Shot Cherry - easier from Elkins direction Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Beth Little <blittle(a)citynet.net> To: Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>; Matt Keller <matt_keller(a)tws.org>; monwimmer(a)gmail.com; Michael Price <greyhawkwv(a)verizon.net>; mwimmer(a)hsc.wvu.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:11:00 PM Subject: RE: Friday meeting If you're coming up Rt 28 from the south, it's much shorter to take FR 112 on the top of Allegheny Mountain. It means several miles on a gravel road, but it is pretty well maintained, and you stay on top of the mountain and avoid going down and back up again. FR 112 comes to a 3 way intersection where you take a right turn (you can see Spruce Lake off to the left) and the lane to Shot Cherry is just a short way on the right. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Sconyers [mailto:jim_scon@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:05 PM To: Matt Keller; monwimmer(a)gmail.com; blittle(a)citynet.net; Michael Price; mwimmer(a)hsc.wvu.edu Subject: Re: Friday meeting We're planning a free-ranging, not-very-structured conversation for Friday evening 6:00 before we turn into werewolves. Then the topics will be on the formal ExCom agenda on Saturday. Agenda and other info attached. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: Matt Keller <matt_keller(a)tws.org> To: Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>; monwimmer(a)gmail.com; blittle(a)citynet.net; Michael Price <greyhawkwv(a)verizon.net>; mwimmer(a)hsc.wvu.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:13:30 AM Subject: Friday meeting Hi Folks, Just wanted to check in on the status of our potential discussion of wilderness, mon issues and wvsc at Shott Cherry this weekend. If we have critical mass for the discussion, I can be there for Friday evening and Saturday morning, but will have to head out before lunch on Saturday. I am glad to give folks a comprehensive update on what is going on with the various endeavors the coalition is moving into beyond the Wild Mon campaign, which remains our top priority and will likely extend in to 2009 unless we get lucky. I can explain the details of what’s going on. My hope for our discussion would be for us to find common ground beyond Wild Mon regarding public lands protection issues that the coalition can continue to work on in its current configuration. I’m a firm believer that combining forces to work on these issues will be our most effective path. Anyway, I think its good timing to have this discussion now. I do think that having Beth, Mary and Mike be a part of this conversation is absolutely critical. Thanks and let me know what you all think….Friday is coming up pretty darn quick. Matt ____________________________ Matt Keller Wilderness Campaign Associate Director The Wilderness Society's Wilderness Support Center 304.864.5530 (office) 304.692.6750 (mobile) 866.422.6896 (fax) matt_keller(a)tws.org ***Please note new email address. I will no longer be using matt.keller(a)wvwild.org.***

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC August 2008