1. Is NYRI dead?
|
No.
For most people, governor-elect Eliot Spitzer's unilateral declaration that "It's dead" has been a blessing and a curse. Many
people were pleased to hear the man who won a four-year lease on the governor's mansion by a huge margin make that
pronouncement. They now hope that the Sheriff of Wall Street will turn his six-guns on New York Regional
Interconnect, Inc. and act swiftly and decisively to run them out of Dodge.
It is one thing to pronounce. It is another to act.
Spitzer sounded the death knell for NYRI based upon his reading of the seemingly universal and nearly virulent public
opposition to the proposed $1.62 billion project. If Spitzer knows of official information to support his belief that public
outcry has killed NYRI, he is not sharing it. There is nothing official stopping this project yet.
Most certainly there have been developments that have shown NYRI to be sick; to even be on life support:
* Every politician worth his/her attack ad railed against NYRI leading up to the recent mid-term election; there was plenty
of bi-partisan bile.
* Gov. Pataki, signing legislation limiting NYRI's use of eminent domain, said hurdles to the project's completion were
insurmountable.
* The Public Service Commission rebuffed NYRI's request for waivers and said its application was incomplete.
* Early on, local communities passed resolutions and moratoria against NYRI's development.
* The City of Utica has challenged the Oneida County Industrial Development Agency's tax deal with New York
Susquehanna and Western Railroad, which leased development rights to NYRI.
Still, to paraphrase Mark Twain, "Reports of NYRI's death have been greatly exaggerated."
|
2. Then is NYRI a "done deal?
|
No.
Since shortly after NYRI announced its project in March, a certain number of persons have assumed that big money and
big government were in cahoots; that the fix was in, the skids have been greased. They assumed -- and not without
historical precedent -- that the public would be ignored and that 120-foot-tall steel towers would begin showing up. And,
they also figured nothing could be done to stop them.
Most public officials and people involved in the citizen opposition believe NYRI is not a fait accompli. They know
stopping it might be difficult, but the fat lady has not sung. People may be jaded and suspicious and made weary by the
fight, but that fight remains.
|
3. What does the recent election mean to the NYRI issue?
|
Several things, mostly depending on the level of government.
New York has gained almost unprecedented power in the U.S Senate. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was elected by a huge
margin and is atop polls for the next election, that one for president in 2008. She is no friend to NYRI. Sen. Charles
Schumer, as head of the Democrats' Senate Campaign Committee, is being credited with engineering his party's wresting
control of the Senate away from Republicans. He too has raised pointed concerns about NYRI. If provisions of the Energy
Act of 2005, which established the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's right to create National Interest Electric
Transmission Corridors, are to be challenged or overturned, it will take some strong senatorial muscle.
For the first time since the arrival of the Edsel, a Democrat is representing a huge chunk of Upstate New York. Oneida
County District Attorney Mike Arcuri defeated Republican Ray Meier for Sherwood Boehlert's congressional seat. While
it will be quite a while before Arcuri enjoys the clout of being a committee chair as Boehlert was, his role in helping
Democrats gains in the House must count for something. Like Meier, Arcuri was strongly opposed to NYRI during the
campaign.
Sue Kelly, a Republican from the 19th Congressional District (Orange, Westchester and Dutchess counties) was a victim
of the national anti-GOP trend. She lost to former Orleans (You're Still The One) lead singer John Hall. Kelly had been
advancing anti-NYRI eminent domain legislation in the House. But Hall is seen as a strong environmental voice. Toss up.
The new governor opposes NYRI. Eliot Spitzer will be watched closely to see if he takes the lead on fighting NYRI in
Washington. Can he leverage his connections with Clinton and Schumer and his national reputation to stop it at the
federal level. Spitzer has already made interesting/encouraging appointments within his transition team. Co-chairs of the
energy and environment committee are:
*Ashok Gupta, senior energy economist and air and energy program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
*Angela M. Sparks-Beddoe, vice president, public affairs of Energy East Management Corporation.
*Cara Lee, program director, The Nature Conservancy.
Still, some suggest that Spitzer is beholden not to Upstate voters -- despite their strong support -- but to the traditional
bastion of the Democrats, New York City. And, it is the city that would most directly benefit from the less-expensive
power NYRI seeks to move from Marcy to New Windsor.
State Senator Dave Valesky, a Democrat from Oneida in Madison County, held off a stiff challenge and returns to Albany
as a member of the energy committee.
What all of this really means remains to be seen. It will come down to how good local government, citizens
organizations and individuals will be at pressuring those in power in Albany and Washington to not just talk, but to act.
|
4. Where does NYRI's application to the Public Service Commission stand?
|
Think of it as in turn-around.
On May 31 NYRI made its application to the state Public Service Commission. When it did, NYRI also asked for a series
of waivers; it asked to not supply some required information until the project was approved and being built.
The PSC, after study, told NYRI its application was deficient; it asked for more information. And, just last week, the PSC
issued its ruling on NYRI's request for waivers. Again, it said no.
Much has been made of NYRI's application and the PSC's response. Some opponents suggest the application was a mere
formality, that NYRI did not truly care about the PSC's response, believing that the presumed final arbiter will be the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Conspiracy theorists in the opposition suggest NYRI will do little to
nothing to complete its application to the PSC, and simply wait for FERC to approve.
|
5. Didn't the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issue new siting guidelines,
and what do they mean to NYRI?
|
Yes.
The week of November 13 FERC issued final electric transmission siting rules as required by the controversial Energy
Policy Act of 2005. These guidelines include how FERC will approve and site transmission lines in what the Energy Policy
Act calls National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETC). These are areas with "power grid capacity
constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers." NYRI had applied earlier this year to have its proposed
project included in such a corridor. That early request was denied. However, when the Energy Department issued its
congestion study, the area proposed by NYRI was included. Still, that does not mean NYRI's project has been or will be
designated as within the NIETC north of New York City. That could be the next step.
Interestingly, one of the things eliminated from the final guidelines was a proposed property value impact analysis.
According to FERC, it was dropped because of concerns whether such analyses are accurate and that they could bog
down the development of a transmission line.
This is a significant disappointment for opponents, who site as one of their primary objections to the NYRI project is the
adverse effect it would have on property values. NYRI has argued there is no measurable impact. Many opponents,
especially municipal officers, claim properties close to the proposed line would be so devalued as to undermine the
community's tax base.
But, the most bitter of pills for NYRI opponents to swallow is the fact that these guidelines include a provision by which
FERC could approve a project -- like NYRI -- that had already been rejected by a state siting authority. (See question six.)
Do not be surprised to see a legal challenge to these guidelines.
|
6. Does that mean it doesn't matter what the PSC says?
|
Yes ... but no.
In announcing new transmission line regulations, FERC Chairman Joseph Kelliher went to considerable lengths to explain
what "withhold approval" means. Kelliher explained that FERC can approve a project like NYRI's if a state doesn't act on
an application within a year or if it acts on it within that time but does not approve it. That appears to be the "yes" in this
equation.
But, not surprisingly, the PSC said the fate of any project, including NYRI, remains in its hands and only its hands. Lawsuits
seem likely any way one looks at this.
It would be surprising if this FERC v PSC issue is not litigated at some point on the basis of state's rights.
|
7. What about the counties? What are they doing?
|
They seem to be very busy.
Elected and staff officials of Madison, Oneida, Herkimer, Chenango, Broome, Delaware, Sullivan and Orange counties are
banded together with leaders of several citizens groups (STOP NYRI, Inc., the Upstate New York Citizens Alliance, Upper
Delaware Council and the Upper Delaware Preservation Coalition) to form Communities Against Regional Interconnect
(CARI). Most of the counties have committed $50,000 each to fight NYRI.
To date, CARI has hired the Syracuse law firm of Gilberti, Stinzano, Heintz and Smith. This is the law firm of former state
Sen. Tarky Lombardi, Jr. The Gilberti firm has also lobbied on behalf of Destiny, USA and NRG Northeast Generating.
Much of their previous work has been appearing before the Public Service Commission on behalf of companies.
CARI also recently hired Sawchuck Brown Associates, an Albany-based public relations/public affairs firm.
Many individuals opposed to NYRI figure CARI will, well, carry the load in the fight. Others see CARI as only one of
several entities engaged in this battle. One thing for certain, the counties have taxpayer money -- and expect to get more
-- with which to wage their fight. The Gilberti firm is seen by many as the tip of the anti-NYRI spear. A few even suggest it
should be the sole legal firm fighting NYRI.
At day's end, CARI is a significant player for the opposition, but not the only one.
|
8. Didn't CARI get $1 million from the state legislature?
|
Yes ... Sort of.
While the state legislature earmarked $1 million for the counties to fight NYRI, it seems as though that check is not in
the mail. CARI continues to work to access that money.
|
9. What about the eminent domain legislation that passed in Albany?
Isn't that going to kill NYRI?
|
No.
When Gov. Pataki signed the legislation he said NYRI's proposed 400,000-volt transmission line would be impossible to
build without the private company having the ability to take the land it needed by eminent domain. While most anti-NYRI
folks agree with Pataki's assessment, they also are realistic enough to expect that legislation to be challenged; many worry
it would not survive a court test.
|
10. What's going to happen with NYRI in 2007?
|
Plenty.
Look for:
* Citizens' groups to become re-energized. Since NYRI's application has been under review and until this week there has
been little meaningful action on other fronts, groups have remained engaged but not with the same white hot ardor of
earlier in the fight. Some mistook this for disengagement.
* The New York State Public Service Commission to most likely rule one way or the other on NYRI's application.
* The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to possibly rule on NYRI's request that its route be designated part
of a National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor.
* Much of the activity surrounding NYRI to shift to Washington, D.C., where Rudy Guiliani's law firm represents NYRI.
* The state legislature to be asked by a growing citizens chorus to revisit Article X, the regulations regarding siting of
generation plants. One of the interests is to site new generation plants as close as possible to the end users of the
electricity.
* Continued conversation on alternative routes for NYRI's project. Favorite alternatives include burying it along the
Thruway or building it along the existing Marcy South line. It has even beeen suggested it be dunked in the Hudson River.
* Efforts to expand the fight both statewide and nationally. Opponents insist more New Yorkers should engage on the
issue because all -- at least those north of Orange County -- would pay more for electricity if the NYRI transmission line
is built. They also believe that NYRI is the tip of the transmission iceberg, and that similar projects will spring up around
the country.
* Discussion within the Spitzer administration about a realistic and holistic energy policy for all of New York.
* Environmental and preservation white knight lawyer from Buffalo Richard Lippes to increase his involvement with the
opposition. He already is leading the legal battle for the Upper Delaware Preservation Coalition, and most likely will for
other organizations as well. Lippes was instrumental in winning the Love Canal lawsuit and represents survivors of those
killed in the 9/11attacks.
* Greater citizen organization discussion about alternatives to NYRI. A recent Rand Corporation said the U.S. can replace
25 percent of its fossil fuel consumption -- and reduce greenhouse gases -- by 2025 and not break the bank. Central and
northern New York are already home to a number of wind farms. But, even clean generation requires transmission lines.
* The conversation to continue about the future of the Indian Point nuke plant on the Hudson River north of New York
City. Since the attacks of 9/11 there has been much clamor to close the plant, which would mean the loss of a major
source of power for New York City.
Stay tuned.
|
|