WE NEED YOUR FINANCIAL HELP!

PLEASE MAKE YOUR CHECK PAYABLE TO:

WCRE

AND MAIL IT TO:

THE WOODLANDS COALITION

657 Hurst Road

Palm Bay, Florida 32907

*In Memoriam

Larry J. Golden, attorney, February 9, 1947- June 23, 2005

A fund has been established in his name to benefit Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Please give generously so that no one else will have to die from brain cancer.

Send checks made to:

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

127 Brigham Tavern Road

Coventry, CT 06238  

!.

ISO-New England Releases Draft Decision on Cost Allocation for Phase One

You can respond!

On Thursday, June 15, 2006, the ISO-NE released its draft decision on the cost allocation for Phase One, Bethel to Norwalk, of the 345Kv transmission upgrade.

This project was introduced to the citizens of Connecticut and the residents of the towns of Bethel, Redding, Wilton, Weston and Norwalk in July of 2001. With that came the organization of the Woodlands Coalition.

Today, the construction of Phase One is nearing completion, expected to go online this Fall. And now, come the costs and who will pay. The decision can be found through this link: ISO-Draft Decision

There is a 30 day response period. You are encouraged to file your response. Please remember, your comments are best heard when presented with facts. For any assistance in responding to the draft, please feel free to contact us at: info@woodlandscoalition.com. For Information about the submission of comments you can go to: Responses to Draft

The Office of Consumer Counsel, the Attorney General and the DPUC are working together with the Governor to ascertain what can be done to assure an equitable solution to this issue. Below, you will find the statement regarding this draft decision from Governor Rell. As they are sent out, we will also add comments from other elected officials here as well.

As they are released, you will find here updated information as well as statements made by our elected officials. 

Information about who ISO-NE is and what they do may be found on their site: About ISO-NE

Governor Rell Critical of Regional Plan to Charge Connecticut Electricity Customers for New Line

Governor Also Denounces Costs from

 Federal Ruling on Power Generation

Governor M. Jodi Rell today criticized a plan by ISO New England Inc., the region’s electric grid operator, to impose inequitable charges on Connecticut electricity customers for a new transmission line in the southwestern part of the state.

The Governor also denounced higher electric rates that will be a byproduct of a ruling today by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to raise capital to support the generation of power. 

I.  ISO New England plan:  penalizing Connecticut

Governor Rell said the ISO New England draft decision on the transmission line funding would “penalize Connecticut by imposing disproportionate costs on our already hard-pressed residential and business electricity consumers, beginning as early as this fall.”

In a letter to ISO New England president and CEO Gordon van Welie, Governor Rell said, “As the second-highest user of electricity in New England , Connecticut already shoulders 27 % of the cost of any new transmission lines in the region.  That means Connecticut ratepayers fund more than a quarter of the costs of any new lines in any of the five other New England states, as well as within our state.  It is unfair to impose additional burdens on Connecticut ratepayers at a time when sharply-increased electric rates have already wreaked havoc on family budgets, hurt senior citizens and adversely impacted both small and large businesses.”

The Governor wrote, “While the Department of Public Utility Control advises that the projected impact would not be especially severe on its own -- in the range of $8 to $12 per year for the average residential customer to start and decreasing annually from there -- the ISO New England draft plan continues a negative and disturbing pattern of electricity rate increases.

“Coupled with soaring gasoline, natural gas and heating oil prices, the cost of electricity has the potential to cause incredible structural damage to the state and regional economies.  A 22% rate increase last January is likely to be followed by an additional rate increase request later this year.  In that context, there is no such thing as a small increase.   It is troubling and problematic for ISO New England to consider even the ‘small’ increase above the normal Connecticut share of 27% for payment of new transmission costs,” the Governor wrote.

That increase over and above Connecticut ’s normal share is projected to be about $4 of the $8-to-$12 that would be added to the average residential customer’s bill annually, according to the Department of Public Utility Control.

Governor Rell’s concern was prompted by the release today of a draft decision by ISO New England about its cost-allocation plan to pay for a new electricity transmission line from Bethel to Norwalk .  [A second and more expensive transmission line, from Middletown to Norwalk , is not covered in the ISO New England draft decision.  Payment through rate increases for that line will be likely determined in 2007 or 2008.]

Generally, when transmission lines are installed all New England states share in the cost through increased rates levied in proportion to the percentage of overall electricity usage by each state.  Connecticut ’s customary share is 27% of the cost, since the state consumes 27% of the electricity used in New England .

However, ISO New England’s plan is to charge Connecticut electricity customers at a disproportionately higher rate than customers in other New England states for parts of the new transmission line from Bethel to Norwalk and, presumably, the Middletown-to-Norwalk line later on.

“It is not acceptable to use the excuse that a portion of underground, instead of overhead, transmission lines are a reason for Connecticut ratepayers to be disproportionately charged,” Governor Rell wrote.  “Lines are buried for valid reasons concerning the environment and public interest.  Connecticut ratepayers deserve and require a fair shake with respect to cost-sharing for new transmission lines deemed necessary for the overall reliability of the New England grid, especially when this state is already bearing more than a quarter of the cost of any new lines in the region.”

The Governor asked Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and Public Utility Control Chairman Donald W. Downes to work together to review and comment on the draft decision and “take all steps necessary to protect the interests of Connecticut electricity ratepayers by countering disproportionate transmission line costs.”

The Governor said she recognizes that issues of power generation and transmission are complex and challenging for ISO New England and other operators nationally.  However, she wrote to Mr. van Welie, “You need to understand the immediate and negative effects that continued rate increases would have on families, individuals and employers in Connecticut .

“This is a matter of serious concern to the State of Connecticut , and I look forward to a fair and equitable resolution,” Governor Rell wrote.

II.  Ruling on ‘LICAP’:  more consumer costs intolerable, Governor says

            Also today, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission announced approval of a ruling that would increase electric rates to pay for maintenance and expansion of the region’s power generation capacity.

            The ISO New England plan in this area, called Locational Installed Capacity (LICAP), would provide additional compensation to power plant owners on the premise that they would be ‘incentivized’ to build new capacity, while maintaining and upgrading current capacity.   Governor Rell had condemned the original plan, which called for two pricing zones in Connecticut , as an “unconscionable gouging of state residents” and damaging to the economy.

            The ruling announced today, reached after negotiations with public utility officials from Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Rhode Island, calls for only one rate-pricing zone in Connecticut, but also for rate increases of 4.5% in 2007; 5.1% in 2008; and 5.99% in 2009.  The rates compare to the original proposal’s 4.86% for 2007; 7.33% for 2008; and 15.23% for 2009.

            “We appreciate the efforts of FERC and ISO New England to be flexible, but these increases are still intolerable,” Governor Rell said.  “People and businesses in Connecticut and other northeastern states are already suffering under tremendous energy costs.  We are seeing one increase after another, and it has to stop.

            “The ruling itself is a better deal than the original plan.  But it simply puts a band-aid on a problem that demands a tourniquet and surgery – simply put, we have an energy cost emergency that cries out for a national energy policy and national energy solutions,” the Governor said.

Planned Pipeline Route !.

Please keep my name on the mailing list for the Broadwater LNG Project.

(Docket No. PF05-4-000)

December 20, 2004 THE LONG ANTICIPATED RELIABILITY OPERABILITY COMMITTEE (ROC) REPORT IS OUT

ROC

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Learn about Energy Conservation

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

KEMA REPORT TO THE SITING COUNCIL

            IMportant LInks to the Applicants                     Siting Council Filings     Supplemental Filing        Fact Sheet    Town by Town Proposals    FAQ      Glossary of Terms

Hearing Updates 

(please note: there have been reports of difficulties  accessing the links. feel free to contact us and we can send you the link directly)

Newspaper article from the Record-Journal about the Woodlands Coalition, July 7, 2004

Group leads fight against power lines
By Christopher Symington, Record-Journal staff

On that evening in June, when Ruth Ann Wiesenthal-Gold met with her first selectman and a small group of others, she could never imagine what she was actually starting.

There was no way of knowing then what challenges — and successes — would follow.

But that small group grew to nearly 6,000, and this summer, the Woodlands Coalition marked its third anniversary as a grassroots organization that's been one of the leading voices in finding compromises to Northeast Utilities' plan for upgrading Connecticut's power grid.

Things they were told to be impossible three years ago became realities for the group and the towns impacted by the proposal to run high-powered electrical lines from Middletown to Norwalk. With a new proposal for Phase II scheduled to be released next month, it doesn't seem as if there will be any slowing the coalition's work.

"It was daunting at the outset, but I never realized the extent it would take me," Wiesenthal-Gold said. "Had anyone told me what I was taking on, I either wouldn't have believed them, or I would have found another way. It's been a tremendous amount of work, but it's phenomenally rewarding."

Since they began, the group has gained the attention and respect of numerous legislators, municipal leaders, and others around the country who sympathize with the coalition's cause. Registered members have addresses from as far as Texas, South Carolina, Minnesota and even Europe, Wiesenthal-Gold said. To her, it emphasizes the fact that the organization has a legitimate interest in not only the outcome, but in preserving the process itself, of speaking out and trying to work together.

"There's people who are awakening to the fact that they can participate," she said. "When people become informed about an issue and about a process, they feel significantly more empowered, and I'm proud of the people who stepped up."

Since the coalition formed, it has become a full-time job for Wiesenthal-Gold, the group's founder and president. She says sarcastically, that she "only" spends between 40 to 60 hours per week, mostly preparing for hearings, talking with legislators, updating the coalition's Web site and researching alternatives to NU's plan.

Her work, however, does not go unnoticed by those along the lines, or by representatives from the company on the other end of the proposal, for that matter. Because the coalition works to find alternatives and compromises — not just to make noise — the two parties have developed a respectful relationship, they say.

The group doesn't "indulge in crazy rhetoric," said Frank Poirot, spokesman for Northeast Utilities.

"By not making it adversarial, we've all benefited," Poirot said. "Their voice is a respected one. For a grass roots organization to be as sophisticated as they are is an accomplishment in itself, but beyond that their leadership is well-versed."

The coalition's interest helped influence a moratorium, which allowed towns in Phase I — the Bethel to Norwalk segment — to work with utilities on a compromise, Wiesenthal-Gold said. The coalition's main goal is to have as much of the power lines buried underground as possible, and the Connecticut Siting Council approved that compromise, which places 11 of the 20 miles in Phase I underground.

"At first, (the utilities) discounted what Woodlands would be able to do, and accomplished," said Wallingford resident Joe Palazzi, the coalition's director. "They've never had to deal with a well-organized activist group; and the Woodlands Coalition brings a balanced view to the approach."

The coalition faces a difficult stage now, in the wake of the Independent Service Organization of New England's suggestion — released last month — that the proposed undergrounding in the lower portion of the Middletown to Norwalk line would be unreliable.

That proposal did not even include sections in the North such as Wallingford and Cheshire, where residents and members of the Woodlands Coalition want the lines buried.

"It was a kick in the gut," Wiesenthal-Gold said.

Representatives of Connecticut Light and Power, United Illuminated, Northeast Utilities and ISO NE are working toward a new proposal, Poirot said, and an updated recommendation is expected to be made to the Siting Council later this summer.

It is a process the Coalition is following closely, checking on a weekly basis for progress updates. The group is also proven itself to be an interested party, even in the review of Development and Management plans being done by the Siting Council for Phase I, already approved, said Siting Council Executive Director Derek Phelps.

"We're thankful they're as involved as they are," Phelps said. "The Siting Council is quite impressed with the role that they've played and the service they've provided."

Although the group formed specifically in response to the original power line application, they will likely continue to grow, lobby and educate people about ways to preserve and improve the environment. In the meantime, rather than just "put their hands on their hips and say, No" coalition members are seeking alternative technologies to the plan, and constantly searching for the balance between the need for more energy and the impact on the environment.

"There's a lot more that can be done in conservation that hasn't been done," Palazzi said. "I think that's a direction we see the Coalition going."

Reprinted with permission from the Record-Journal

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Woodlands Coalition is a Connecticut corporation dedicated to preserving and enhancing the wooded nature of our State. We are a grass roots organization that seeks to achieve its mission through education of the public and through the advocacy of public policy change at the local, State and Federal level. We seek to ensure that proposed public infrastructure works are founded on realistic assessments of the public need, account for advances in technology and that do the least damage to the woodland ecology. We believe that the slow return of large areas of the Connecticut landscape to mixed woodlands is a significant public good that is supported and appreciated by most citizens of the state.

The Woodlands Coalition is a non-profit, volunteer organization, funded solely by your donations.

"To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them."

Theodore Roosevelt, Message to Congress; December 3, 1907

Page last updated 7-14-2004