PSC Seeks Public Input on Con Edison Gas and Steam Rates
by New York State Public Service Commission
ALBANY, NY (06/01/2010)(readMedia)-- The New York State Public Service Commission will hold public statement hearings and otherwise seek public comments on cases concerning Joint Proposals for Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (Con Edison) to increase its annual revenues for steam and gas services. On May 18, 2010, comprehensive Joint Proposals were filed by interested parties in each case for consideration by the Commission. The Joint Proposals recommend three-year rate plans for steam and gas services commencing October 1, 2010 and continuing through September 30, 2013.
The public statement hearings will be held on:
Yonkers: TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2010, 1:30 p.m.
Grinton I. Will Library
1500 Central Park Avenue
Yonkers, New York
Manhattan: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 2010, 7:00 p.m.
City University of New York
The Graduate Center, Proshansky Auditorium C
Level (elevator one level down from lobby)
365 5th Avenue (between 34th & 35th Streets)
New York, New York
Steam Joint Proposal
The Joint Proposal in the steam rate case calls for a three-year rate plan with levelized annual increases of $49.5 million per year (7.01%, 6.52%, and 6.09%) on total revenues in Rate Years 1 through 3, respectively.
The Joint Proposal in the steam rate case also proposes to resolve an issue concerning the allocation of costs of the East River Repowering Project (ERRP) between the Company's electric and steam systems. The issue was most recently under consideration in Case 09-S-0029, the steam planning case, but was later consolidated for decision in the steam rate case.
The Joint Proposal recommends reallocating $7.5 million per year in ERRP fuel costs from the electric system to the steam system beginning in Rate Year 2 and continuing in Rate Year 3 and beyond, until changed by the Commission.
Gas Joint Proposal
The Joint Proposal in the gas rate case supports a three-year rate plan with annual increases of $47.1 million (2.4% on total bills, or 6.1% on delivery only), $47.9 million (2.3% on total bills, or 5.8% on delivery only), and $46.7 million (2.2% on total bills, or 5.3% on delivery only) in Rate Years 1 through 3, respectively.
The Commission may adopt the terms of the Joint Proposals in whole or in part, adopt alternative terms, or adopt terms concerning matters not addressed in the Joint Proposals.
Public Statement Hearings
It is not necessary to make an appointment in advance or to present written material in order to speak at a public statement hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. Speakers will be called after completing a request card. All comments at the hearing will become part of the Commission's formal record for the case to which they pertain. Each hearing session will remain open for at least one hour and, if necessary to accommodate persons wishing to speak, will continue for no more than one additional hour.
Disabled persons desiring special accommodations may place a collect call to the Department of Public Service's Human Resource Management Office at 1 (518) 474-2520 and should do so as soon as possible.
Other Ways to Comment
Writing: Those who cannot attend or who prefer not to speak at a public statement hearing may comment by writing to Jaclyn A. Brilling, Secretary, Public Service Commission, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223-1350. If concerned with the steam rate case, your comments should refer to "Case 09-S-0794 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. – Steam Rates." If concerned with the gas rates case, your comments should refer to "Case 09-G-0795 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. – Gas Rates."
Toll-free opinion line: You may also submit comments through the Commission's Opinion Line at 1 (800) 335-2120. This number is designed to take comments about pending cases from in-state callers 24 hours a day. Callers should select English or Spanish and press 1 to leave comments. In your comments, refer to the steam rate case or the gas rate case as explained above.
Internet: You may also submit comments through the "PSC Comment Form" in the "Consumer Assistance" file available on the Commission's website at www.dps.state.ny.us or through the "Contact Us" link at www.AskPSC.com. Many libraries offer free Internet access. In your comments, refer to the steam rate case or the gas rate case as indicated above.
All comments submitted by one of these alternative means are due as soon as possible, but must be received no later than August 2, 2010. All timely comments the Commission receives become part of the official case record, are posted on the Commission's website for public inspection, and will be summarized for the Commission for consideration in its deliberations.
Persons interested in the Company's filings may view them, the Joint Proposals, and summaries of the Joint Proposals at the Commission's offices, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY, or on the Commission's website-www.dps.state.ny.us, click on "What's New;" then click on "Case 09-S-0794 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for Steam Service" or "Case 09-G-0795 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for Gas Service."
Hard copies of the Joint Proposals and summaries also can viewed at:
Manhattan
Con Edison Headquarters
4 Irving Place
New York, NY
* * * * *
Con Edison Office
116 East 124th Street
Harlem, NY
Queens
Con Edison Office
89-67 162nd Street
Jamaica, NY
Bronx
Con Edison Office
448 East Fordham Road
Bronx, NY
Westchester
Con Edison Office
One Pathmark Plaza
Mount Vernon, NY
* * * * *
Grinton I. Will Library
1500 Central Park Avenue
Yonkers, NY
-30-
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE PSC-NOTICE INVITING COMMENTS
STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
CASE 10-E-0155 - Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to New York State’s Electric Utility Transmission Right-of-Way Management Practices.
NOTICE INVITING COMMENTS
April 20, 2010
This proceeding was instituted to consider New York State electric utility transmission right-of-way (ROW) management practices. In this proceeding, the Commission seeks comment on the implementation of utility ROW management practices and the contribution of ROW management to the safety and reliability of the State’s electric transmission system. In addition, comment is sought on the balancing achieved by these utility practices of the concerns of ratepayers, neighboring property owners, the public, and other interested parties.
More specifically, comments are invited on the following questions:
1. Do the programs used by State utilities for transmission ROW vegetation management conform to industry best practices?
2. At what point, at what height, or under what circumstances should the trees be removed from the transmission ROW in order to protect the safety and reliability of the transmission system?
3. Are alternate or supplemental practices available which would reduce the environmental or aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW vegetation management without compromising transmission system safety or reliability?
4. If supplemental vegetation management practices are preferred by a community through which transmission ROW passes, how should the community preference for such practices be demonstrated? How should the costs of such practices be distributed to or divided among the utility which owns the transmission line, the ratepayers for that utility, the users of the transmission line, the community through which the transmission line passes, and the owners of properties adjacent to the transmission line?
5. In what ways can a utility mitigate the impact of its transmission ROW management practices without sacrificing electric system safety and reliability?
6. Are there cost effective strategies available to utilities to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW management?
7. Is cleanup after utility ROW management activities adequate?
8. What type of notifications regarding vegetation management do utilities currently employ? What type of notification by utilities would be most effective for landowners who live adjacent to a ROW prior to utility transmission ROW vegetation management work (for example: phone call, letter, newspaper, other)? When and how frequently should such notice be provided? Should others, besides adjacent property owners, be notified? What information should be provided in such notices?
9. Apart from such notices, what information should utilities provide to the owners of property adjacent to utility transmission ROW to suggest strategies or practices a landowner may use to protect his or her land from the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW maintenance, and at what intervals and through what means should this information be provided?
Interested parties are invited to file their comments electronically by June 16, 2010, and these comments will be made available to all interested persons, under the above case number, through the Department’s website at
http://www.dps.state.ny.us/New_Search.html.
Any party wishing to respond or reply to a comment made by another party may do so through reply comments which are to be filed electronically by July 6, 2010. Electronic filing for comments and reply comments may be completed by e-mailing the filing, under the above case number, to secretary@dps.state.ny.us.
Each party submitting comments will be added to the service list for this case. Anyone wishing to be added to the service list may also consent to receive electronic service of all commission issued documents. To do so, you may email a letter to the Secretary at secretary@dps.state.ny.us consenting to receive electronic service of issued documents. Please understand that if you agree to electronic service, you will be sent the issued document(s) immediately and you will not receive paper copies. If you do not consent to electronic service, you will receive paper copies by US Postal Service, 3-5 days after issuance. If an interested party does not intend to submit comments but wishes to be added to the service list, the party should notify the Secretary of this not later than May 19, 2010 and request that the party be added to such list.
JACLYN A. BRILLING
Secretary
CASE 10-E-0155 - Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to New York State’s Electric Utility Transmission Right-of-Way Management Practices.
NOTICE INVITING COMMENTS
April 20, 2010
This proceeding was instituted to consider New York State electric utility transmission right-of-way (ROW) management practices. In this proceeding, the Commission seeks comment on the implementation of utility ROW management practices and the contribution of ROW management to the safety and reliability of the State’s electric transmission system. In addition, comment is sought on the balancing achieved by these utility practices of the concerns of ratepayers, neighboring property owners, the public, and other interested parties.
More specifically, comments are invited on the following questions:
1. Do the programs used by State utilities for transmission ROW vegetation management conform to industry best practices?
2. At what point, at what height, or under what circumstances should the trees be removed from the transmission ROW in order to protect the safety and reliability of the transmission system?
3. Are alternate or supplemental practices available which would reduce the environmental or aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW vegetation management without compromising transmission system safety or reliability?
4. If supplemental vegetation management practices are preferred by a community through which transmission ROW passes, how should the community preference for such practices be demonstrated? How should the costs of such practices be distributed to or divided among the utility which owns the transmission line, the ratepayers for that utility, the users of the transmission line, the community through which the transmission line passes, and the owners of properties adjacent to the transmission line?
5. In what ways can a utility mitigate the impact of its transmission ROW management practices without sacrificing electric system safety and reliability?
6. Are there cost effective strategies available to utilities to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW management?
7. Is cleanup after utility ROW management activities adequate?
8. What type of notifications regarding vegetation management do utilities currently employ? What type of notification by utilities would be most effective for landowners who live adjacent to a ROW prior to utility transmission ROW vegetation management work (for example: phone call, letter, newspaper, other)? When and how frequently should such notice be provided? Should others, besides adjacent property owners, be notified? What information should be provided in such notices?
9. Apart from such notices, what information should utilities provide to the owners of property adjacent to utility transmission ROW to suggest strategies or practices a landowner may use to protect his or her land from the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW maintenance, and at what intervals and through what means should this information be provided?
Interested parties are invited to file their comments electronically by June 16, 2010, and these comments will be made available to all interested persons, under the above case number, through the Department’s website at
http://www.dps.state.ny.us/New_Search.html.
Any party wishing to respond or reply to a comment made by another party may do so through reply comments which are to be filed electronically by July 6, 2010. Electronic filing for comments and reply comments may be completed by e-mailing the filing, under the above case number, to secretary@dps.state.ny.us.
Each party submitting comments will be added to the service list for this case. Anyone wishing to be added to the service list may also consent to receive electronic service of all commission issued documents. To do so, you may email a letter to the Secretary at secretary@dps.state.ny.us consenting to receive electronic service of issued documents. Please understand that if you agree to electronic service, you will be sent the issued document(s) immediately and you will not receive paper copies. If you do not consent to electronic service, you will receive paper copies by US Postal Service, 3-5 days after issuance. If an interested party does not intend to submit comments but wishes to be added to the service list, the party should notify the Secretary of this not later than May 19, 2010 and request that the party be added to such list.
JACLYN A. BRILLING
Secretary
A Small Victory....FORWARD HO!
I am pleased to announce the first steps in our restoration efforts. It may not seem that these replantings are meaningful, but it took tremendous effort for our community to make this happen. It should be recognized and celebrated, however, our battle continues.
Please sustain your voice to bring about more change. We need to participate in the New York State Public Service Commission's Case 10-E-1055 in huge force.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Notice to Invite Comments
PSC Documents re: Case 10-E-0155
PSC Order Instituting Proceedings
Notice to Invite Comments
From the PSC's Notice filing:
Comments are invited on the following questions:
1. Do the programs used by State utilities for transmission ROW vegetation management conform to industry best practices?
2. At what point, at what height, or under what circumstances should the trees be removed from the transmission ROW in order to protect the safety and reliability of the transmission system?
3. Are alternate or supplemental practices available which would reduce the environmental or aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW vegetation management without compromising transmission system safety or reliability?
4. If supplemental vegetation management practices are preferred by a community through which transmission ROW passes, how should the community preference for such practices be demonstrated? How should the costs of such practices be distributed to or divided among the utility which owns the transmission line, the ratepayers for that utility, the users of the transmission line, the community through which the transmission line passes, and the owners of properties adjacent to the transmission line?
5. In what ways can a utility mitigate the impact of its transmission ROW management practices without sacrificing electric system safety and reliability?
6. Are there cost effective strategies available to utilities to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW management?
7. Is cleanup after utility ROW management activities adequate?
8. What type of notifications regarding vegetation management do utilities currently employ? What type of notification by utilities would be most effective for landowners who live adjacent to a ROW prior to utility transmission ROW vegetation management work (for example: phone call, letter, newspaper, other)? When and how frequently should such notice be provided? Should others, besides adjacent property owners, be notified? What information should be provided in such notices?
9. Apart from such notices, what information should utilities provide to the owners of property adjacent to utility transmission ROW to suggest strategies or practices a landowner may use to protect his or her land from the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW maintenance, and at what intervals and through whatshould this information be provided?
PSC Order Instituting Proceedings
Notice to Invite Comments
From the PSC's Notice filing:
Comments are invited on the following questions:
1. Do the programs used by State utilities for transmission ROW vegetation management conform to industry best practices?
2. At what point, at what height, or under what circumstances should the trees be removed from the transmission ROW in order to protect the safety and reliability of the transmission system?
3. Are alternate or supplemental practices available which would reduce the environmental or aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW vegetation management without compromising transmission system safety or reliability?
4. If supplemental vegetation management practices are preferred by a community through which transmission ROW passes, how should the community preference for such practices be demonstrated? How should the costs of such practices be distributed to or divided among the utility which owns the transmission line, the ratepayers for that utility, the users of the transmission line, the community through which the transmission line passes, and the owners of properties adjacent to the transmission line?
5. In what ways can a utility mitigate the impact of its transmission ROW management practices without sacrificing electric system safety and reliability?
6. Are there cost effective strategies available to utilities to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW management?
7. Is cleanup after utility ROW management activities adequate?
8. What type of notifications regarding vegetation management do utilities currently employ? What type of notification by utilities would be most effective for landowners who live adjacent to a ROW prior to utility transmission ROW vegetation management work (for example: phone call, letter, newspaper, other)? When and how frequently should such notice be provided? Should others, besides adjacent property owners, be notified? What information should be provided in such notices?
9. Apart from such notices, what information should utilities provide to the owners of property adjacent to utility transmission ROW to suggest strategies or practices a landowner may use to protect his or her land from the aesthetic impacts of transmission ROW maintenance, and at what intervals and through whatshould this information be provided?
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Provide Feedback On Tree Cutting By Local Utility Companies
Provide Feedback On Tree Cutting By Local Utility Companies
Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins is urging local residents to provide feedback on ways electric utility providers can improve the current clear cutting methods around power lines in the region. The Public Safety Commission recently announced that it is conducting a review of the right of way (ROW) practices and has requested input from members of the community.
In March, after holding community forums and touring impacted areas for several months, Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins introduced legislation addressing the concerns being raised by hundreds of constituents, which impacts the community notification and input process related to ROW management. The Public Safety Commission cited the proposed legislation as well as efforts made by local residents as influential in their decision to review right of way practices.
Please take a moment to sign the online petition and share your thoughts on this important issue!
“This is an opportunity to shape the public process, as a result of the collective efforts of those concerned about these issues. This feedback can be instrumental in urging my colleagues to support the legislation in the Senate and encouraging the Public Safety Commission to make appropriate revisions to their policies, ensuring every avenue is explored to address the valid concerns of our residents,” said Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins.
LINK PROVIDED BELOW:
http://www.nysenate.gov/petition/join-fight-provide-feedback-tree-cutting-local-utility-companies
Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins is urging local residents to provide feedback on ways electric utility providers can improve the current clear cutting methods around power lines in the region. The Public Safety Commission recently announced that it is conducting a review of the right of way (ROW) practices and has requested input from members of the community.
In March, after holding community forums and touring impacted areas for several months, Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins introduced legislation addressing the concerns being raised by hundreds of constituents, which impacts the community notification and input process related to ROW management. The Public Safety Commission cited the proposed legislation as well as efforts made by local residents as influential in their decision to review right of way practices.
Please take a moment to sign the online petition and share your thoughts on this important issue!
“This is an opportunity to shape the public process, as a result of the collective efforts of those concerned about these issues. This feedback can be instrumental in urging my colleagues to support the legislation in the Senate and encouraging the Public Safety Commission to make appropriate revisions to their policies, ensuring every avenue is explored to address the valid concerns of our residents,” said Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins.
LINK PROVIDED BELOW:
http://www.nysenate.gov/petition/join-fight-provide-feedback-tree-cutting-local-utility-companies
Friday, April 16, 2010
THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION HAS DECIDED TO REVIEW THEIR TRANSMISSION LINES VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN.
STATE OF NEW YORK
Public Service Commission
Garry A. Brown
Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223
Further Details: James Denn
james_denn@dps.state.ny.us | 518.474.7080
http://www.dps.state.ny.us 10035/10-E-0155
TRANSMISSION LINE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES REVIEWED
— Public Comments Sought on Utility Vegetation Management —Albany, NY—04/15/10—The New York State Public Service Commission (Commission) today commenced a proceeding to consider electric utility transmission right-of-way (ROW) management practices. As a result of its decision, the Commission will seek comments on the implementation of utility ROW management practices and the contribution of ROW management to the safety and reliability of the state’s electric transmission system. In addition, comments will be sought on the balancing needed to be achieved by these utility practices of the concerns of ratepayers, neighboring property owners, the public, and other interested parties.
“Maintaining the highest degree of electric system reliability for the benefit of New York’s customers is among the most important of our responsibilities,” said Commission Chairman Garry Brown. “Reliability of the electric system depends upon the safe and effective transmission of electric power from the source of its generation. Effective right-of-way management is an essential component of system reliability. However, we must ensure this is being done in the best possible manner.”
The Commission’s policy regarding ROW management established requirements for utilities’ ROW maintenance programs and ensured adequate record keeping and reporting by the utilities. In addition, the federal Energy Policy Act imposes additional mandatory and enforceable reliability standards for utility ROW maintenance.
In recent months, members of the public and elected officials have expressed concern with respect to the ROW vegetation management practices used by utilities to implement the above described regulatory scheme along their transmission rights-of-way. These concerns have largely focused on the trimming and removal of trees and other vegetation by utilities in their transmission rights-of-way. Those objecting to the utilities’ practices cite the unwanted aesthetic impacts associated with the utilities’ ROW work, as well as noise, erosion and decreased property value as potential results. Expressions of concern have taken many forms including individual complaints to this department, letters from public officials, municipal resolutions and proposed state legislation.
In view of the widespread importance of transmission ROW management and the concerns that have been expressed regarding vegetation management, comments will be sought from the public and elected representatives, municipal resolutions and proposed legislation, to determine whether changes to our ROW management policy are needed to ensure that the transmission system in our state will continue to be operated in a safe, effective and environmentally compatible manner.
In addition to the submission of comments, public hearings at which persons who would rather comment orally may do so, are being considered. After consideration of the materials developed as comments or reply comments or through the public statement hearings, Staff will report back to the Commission summarizing and evaluating the information provided and making recommendations, if further Commission action is needed.
Interested parties are invited to file their comments electronically by June 16, 2010, and these comments will be made available to all interested persons through the Department’s website at http://www.dps.state.ny.us/New_Search.html. Any party wishing to respond or reply to a comment made by another party may do so through reply comments which are to be filed electronically by July 6, 2010. Electronic filing for comments and reply comments may be completed by e-mailing the filing, under the above case number to secretary@dps.state.ny.us.
The Commission’s decision today, when issued, may be obtained by going to the Commission Documents section of the Commission’s Web site at www.dps.state.ny.us and entering Case Number 10-E-0155 in the input box labeled “Search for Case/Matter Number.” Many libraries offer free Internet access. Commission orders may also be obtained from the Commission’s Files Office, 14th floor, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 (518-474-2500).
Public Service Commission
Garry A. Brown
Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223
Further Details: James Denn
james_denn@dps.state.ny.us | 518.474.7080
http://www.dps.state.ny.us 10035/10-E-0155
TRANSMISSION LINE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES REVIEWED
— Public Comments Sought on Utility Vegetation Management —Albany, NY—04/15/10—The New York State Public Service Commission (Commission) today commenced a proceeding to consider electric utility transmission right-of-way (ROW) management practices. As a result of its decision, the Commission will seek comments on the implementation of utility ROW management practices and the contribution of ROW management to the safety and reliability of the state’s electric transmission system. In addition, comments will be sought on the balancing needed to be achieved by these utility practices of the concerns of ratepayers, neighboring property owners, the public, and other interested parties.
“Maintaining the highest degree of electric system reliability for the benefit of New York’s customers is among the most important of our responsibilities,” said Commission Chairman Garry Brown. “Reliability of the electric system depends upon the safe and effective transmission of electric power from the source of its generation. Effective right-of-way management is an essential component of system reliability. However, we must ensure this is being done in the best possible manner.”
The Commission’s policy regarding ROW management established requirements for utilities’ ROW maintenance programs and ensured adequate record keeping and reporting by the utilities. In addition, the federal Energy Policy Act imposes additional mandatory and enforceable reliability standards for utility ROW maintenance.
In recent months, members of the public and elected officials have expressed concern with respect to the ROW vegetation management practices used by utilities to implement the above described regulatory scheme along their transmission rights-of-way. These concerns have largely focused on the trimming and removal of trees and other vegetation by utilities in their transmission rights-of-way. Those objecting to the utilities’ practices cite the unwanted aesthetic impacts associated with the utilities’ ROW work, as well as noise, erosion and decreased property value as potential results. Expressions of concern have taken many forms including individual complaints to this department, letters from public officials, municipal resolutions and proposed state legislation.
In view of the widespread importance of transmission ROW management and the concerns that have been expressed regarding vegetation management, comments will be sought from the public and elected representatives, municipal resolutions and proposed legislation, to determine whether changes to our ROW management policy are needed to ensure that the transmission system in our state will continue to be operated in a safe, effective and environmentally compatible manner.
In addition to the submission of comments, public hearings at which persons who would rather comment orally may do so, are being considered. After consideration of the materials developed as comments or reply comments or through the public statement hearings, Staff will report back to the Commission summarizing and evaluating the information provided and making recommendations, if further Commission action is needed.
Interested parties are invited to file their comments electronically by June 16, 2010, and these comments will be made available to all interested persons through the Department’s website at http://www.dps.state.ny.us/New_Search.html. Any party wishing to respond or reply to a comment made by another party may do so through reply comments which are to be filed electronically by July 6, 2010. Electronic filing for comments and reply comments may be completed by e-mailing the filing, under the above case number to secretary@dps.state.ny.us.
The Commission’s decision today, when issued, may be obtained by going to the Commission Documents section of the Commission’s Web site at www.dps.state.ny.us and entering Case Number 10-E-0155 in the input box labeled “Search for Case/Matter Number.” Many libraries offer free Internet access. Commission orders may also be obtained from the Commission’s Files Office, 14th floor, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 (518-474-2500).
Friday, April 9, 2010
PROGRESS IS BEING MADE
Just an update: I saw surveyors working on the Catskill ROW yesterday. This was mandated by the NYS DOT. Hopefully we will see the ground being prepared for plantings. The plan so far is two rows of White Spruce, and additional plantings along the Sprain Parkway.
KEEP THE PRESSURE ON!
KEEP THE PRESSURE ON!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
