Sun rising on more hearings on power line

By: EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff Writer | Sunday, December 16, 2007 11:20 PM PST

Richard Zelmer of Ramona holds a protest sign inside the California Public Utilities meeting on the proposed SDG&E new power line that would run through Ramona and the back country of North San Diego County on Tuesday at the Ramona Community Center.
BILL WECHTER Staff Photographer
Order a copy of this photo
Visit our Photo Gallery

A new round of public hearings set to begin in February will give those for and against San Diego Gas & Electric's controversial proposal to build high-power lines across the county, known as the Sunrise Powerlink, a chance to voice their opinions.

The hearings, and the Jan. 8 deadline for the release of an environmental review of the project, have SDG&E and the project's opponents ready to renew the debate over the proposed 150-mile line.

"It's become very clear through the proceedings that this project is not just totally unnecessary, it's also devastating to the natural environment," said David Hogan, a San Diego spokesman for the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity.

The utility contends that the line is needed to curb greenhouse gas emissions by switching much of San Diego County's electricity base to solar, wind and geothermal plants.

SDG&E faces a 2010 state mandate to secure 20 percent of its electricity from nonfossil-fuel sources such as solar. And it says Sunrise is key to meeting that target.

The first of this second round of hearings before the state's Public Utilities Commission will be held Feb. 25 in Pine Valley. Two others are scheduled for Feb. 26, one in Borrego Springs and one in Ramona.

The new schedule set by Administrative Law Judge Steven A. Weissman lists August as the commission's first opportunity to make a decision.

The second round of hearings became necessary when Commissioner Dian M. Grueneich abruptly halted July hearings in San Diego amid environmental and financial questions.

The move pushed back the timetable for reviewing the utility's application by a half year. By the utility's past estimates, that should make it likely the proposed, huge 500-kilovolt wires won't be energized until at least 2011.

But Jennifer Briscoe, a spokeswoman for the utility company, said Friday the timetable set by Weissman for the hearings was "very standard" and did "not delay any of the schedule."

San Diego Gas & Electric Co., which proposed the project in late 2005 as a way to boost the region's electricity supply and plug into nonfossil-fuel energy, had hoped to begin construction by spring 2008 and begin using the line by summer 2010.

"We're pleased with the judge's ruling," Briscoe said. "It moves us one step closer to getting the power line approved."

Opponents of the plan had asked Weissman to grant them 90 days to review the project's environmental impact study, due to be released no later than Jan. 8, and prepare for testimony. The utility asked for 30 days, the minimum allowed by law.

Weissman split the difference in his Tuesday ruling, ordering a comment period of 60 days.

"We will consider the proposed project carefully and in great detail, but we must continue to do all we can to pursue a timely decision," Weissman wrote in his ruling.

Activists opposing the project said they were pleased with the two-month comment period.

"I think that's good because this is very complex," said Diane Conklin of Ramona, a spokeswoman for a coalition of North County residents spread from the ocean to the desert who oppose the power line.

The $1.3 billion project calls for a high-voltage power line that would run 150 miles from El Centro to San Diego, and pass through Ramona, Rancho Penasquitos and Anza-Borrego Desert State Park along the way.

Opponents of a power line proposed for the North County backcountry filed reports over the weekend charging that the October wildfires illustrated dramatically the need to scrap the power line.

In all likelihood, a line built on the proposed route would have been taken out by October's Witch Creek fire, the fourth-largest wildfire in California history, opponents say.

The Utility Consumers' Action Network, a San Diego advocacy group, suggested that one of San Diego Gas & Electric Co.'s principal arguments for building the line ---- that it would give San Diego County a more reliable power supply ---- was undermined during the fires.

Michael Shames, Utility Consumers' Action Network executive director, said he was pleased that the judge took note of the group's fire concerns, which Weissman said the commission would like to explore during the hearings.

"Perhaps the most important part of the ruling is the judge's determination to further explore the fire-related issues," Shames said.

Contact staff writer Edward Sifuentes at (760) 740-3511 or esifuentes@nctimes.com.

Public participation hearings for the Sunrise Powerlink:

Feb. 25

Mountain Empire High School, 3305 Buckman Springs Rd., Pine Valley, 6:30 p.m.

Feb. 26

Borrego Springs Resort, 1112 Tilting T Drive, Borrego Springs, 1 p.m.

Charles Nunn Performing Arts Center, 1521 Hanson Lane, Ramona, 7 p.m.

Next Previous
12 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

Non-fossil fuel - no way ! wrote on Dec 17, 2007 7:02 AM:At least they are waiting until after the holidays to release the draft EIR for comments. ...

Nuke it wrote on Dec 17, 2007 10:55 AM:Just build a big Nuclear power plant or two in San Diego and mandate solar panels on ALL new or renovated construction on the county with SDG&E mandated to buy all the solar power produced at the same price they pay plus the same fees they charge.

WeNeedEnergy wrote on Dec 17, 2007 11:54 AM:Glad to see the project is moving forward. It's really the best option. All of that solar and wind power is just sitting there untapped in the Imeprial Valley. I'd rather have Sunrise than a nuclear plant or a conventional polluting plant in my neighborhood.

To: We Need Energy wrote on Dec 17, 2007 1:07 PM:Yes, we do need energy. We need clean energy. We need SDG&E to provide incentives for solar power and to pay for all solar-generated power at the same fees they charge. None of this net-metering and the excess credit ($$$) gets wiped out. No way should we submit to Sunrise Powerlink. It is just a way for SEMPRA to run high-power lines through our back country. Create peaker plants and solar energy, and maybe even increase nuclear powered generation of electricity with another generator at San Onofre - to replace Generator #!

Ned the energy wrote on Dec 17, 2007 2:09 PM:We need the energy and why not get the renewables from Imperial Valley? Environmental hypocrites, they want renewables but haven't found any they like yet or refuse to accept the fact that you do need transmission lines to get the renewables from the source to the user. Have you seen the Sierra Club support any wind energy projects in San Diego yet? There always is a problem for any project they look at. Why won't they just come out and say it is population growth (including births) they are against?

Kelly wrote on Dec 17, 2007 2:43 PM:Ned needs a memory update. The Sierra Club did not oppose the wind energy project on the Kumeyaay Reservation. Nor did the Sierra Club oppose the transmission upgrade for it.

What renewables ? wrote on Dec 17, 2007 2:50 PM:Last time I looked into it, the power from renewables they claim will come from the Imperial Valley, are in fact electricity generated by plants that will be using the new LNG fuel from the terminal owned and operated by SEMPRA south of Tijuana. I would really like to know what renewable energy sources they are going to use to provide all of the power ?

The Sierra wrote on Dec 17, 2007 3:04 PM:Club only supports one wind project. Their own blah blah blah to get more suckers to send them donations!

resident wrote on Dec 17, 2007 5:33 PM:I don't want your power lines crossing my property... Get outta there

burt wrote on Dec 17, 2007 10:34 PM:use all the solar and rooftops right here in San Diego County, and pay the consumer the same fees we're being charged.

Sunrise Powerlink not using renewable energy wrote on Dec 18, 2007 6:07 PM:Sunrise Powerlink is supposed to be providing us power from renewable resources, or at least that's the pitch. What is renewable about the LNG fuel that will be being used in the power plants in San Diego and Imperial Counties as well as just across the border into Mexico. Just exactly WHAT is renewable about that source or sources of energy. Renewable power is solar power, wind power, hydro-electric power, tidal wave power, and others that are already occurring and we can harness their use to create electricity, but that will not reduce the natural power of the sun, wind, and water.

Bob wrote on Jan 10, 2008 1:25 PM:Why don't they just run it along interstate 8 into San Diego?

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

Submit Comment[-]

(optional)
   

Advertisement

Videos