Federal authority over transmission siting may be reshuffled

U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Chu is considering a policy change that will affect how electricity transmission lines are sited and built.  Since the dawn of the electric power industry, states have had the authority over whether the siting of a given transmission facility should be permitted within their boundaries.  That traditional states’ right may be shifting away to the federal level.

Since the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Department has had “backstop” authority to approve transmission line routes when states fail to issue approvals.  In 2007, the Department of Energy used this authority to designate corridors of highly congested transmission lines in the mid-Atlantic area (parts of Delaware, Ohio, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia) and the southwest (parts of southern California and western Arizona).   

Proposed new transmission facilities located within these designated National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors can apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for siting approval if a host state does not approve the project within one year.  This could happen if a state regulatory proceeding drags on for longer than a year, or if state regulators condition project approvals in a manner that is not “economically feasible” – both results more likely to happen in connection with larger and more controversial transmission line projects.  While the Commission initially approved some transmission line siting applications that had been denied by state regulators, a federal appeals court held that the Commission lacked authority to approve a project in the face of a state’s affirmative denial (as opposed to mere regulatory delay).

At issue now is whether the Department of Energy should delegate its corridor designation function to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  Proponents of the measure point to the need for increased transmission development, citing the growth of renewable resources located far from customer loads as well as transmission congestion; they believe the Commission will be better suited to the task of studying congestion and designating national corridors than the Department is.  Others oppose this proposed delegation, noting that Congress specifically divided the corridor designation and project approval functions between the Department and the Commission, and that states retain the ultimate rights to deny a siting application.  A number of comments have been submitted to the Department on this proposed delegation.

4/13/10

Maine news:

After the removal of the Fort Halifax dam, erosion continues to threaten the Fort Hill cemetery in Winslow.

The Maine Legislature concluded its session yesterday. Although they did approve putting a bond package to the voters, the approved measure does not include the energy efficiency funding that was initially proposed by Governor Baldacci.

The last bill enacted by the 124th Legislature was the energy corridor bill, which provides procedures for the review of proposals to develop transmission lines, pipelines, and other major energy infrastructure.

3/22/10

A small fire broke out inside a trash shredder at the Biddeford, Maine waste-to-energy plant Maine Energy Recovery Company (MERC). Perhaps the energy content of the fuel was just bursting to be set free.

Remember the battle over whether the Fort Halifax dam and its associated hydroelectric generating capacity on the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine should be removed? The 100-year-old dam was breached in July 2008 after lengthy debate and legal proceedings. , In essence, dam owner FPL Energy Maine Hydro (formerly Florida Power & Light, now NextEra) found itself burdened by a fish passage requirement imposed during the Edwards Dam removal proceedings. Under the Kennebec Hydro Developers Group Agreement (or the KHDG Agreement), FPL found itself either required to breach the dam or install a particular fish passage technology. FPL elected to breach the dam. Many people, including state representative Ken Fletcher of Winslow, opposed this decision, arguing that FPL's choice would have dire environmental and cost consequences, and that it was bad policy in light of the overall push for more renewable capacity. Representative Fletcher has now filed a document with the Maine DEP demonstrating costs to taxpayers of between $950,000 and $1.6 million. Key cost components include: $114,997 for the town's share of replacing a sewer line exposed after breach, $30,375 in costs for title and survey work over and above the value the town recovered by selling formerly submerged lands, $800,000 more than previously estimated to replace the Mile Brook Bridge on Garland Road due to erosion, , and $725,396 to demolish six homes on an unstable riverside slope on Dallaire Street.

The "energy corridor" bill in Maine was voted Ought to Pass as Amended by the Joint Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy. Among the issues are how Maine should regulate high-impact transmission lines connecting the massive hydroelectric capacity of Hydro-Quebec to southern New England markets, given that these lines will affect Maine's costs and strategic energy position.

The AP is covering a story about a California water district's proposed use of 47 square miles of poorly-managed farmland -- land that due to bad water use is now very salty -- for a solar photovoltaic farm of up to one gigawatt.

Who wants free money? $1.3 million in energy grants through Efficiency Maine to Northern Maine Community College in Presque Isle, Eastern Maine Community College in Bangor, Kennebec Community College in Augusta and Southern Maine Community College in South Portland. $2 million in grants for water projects too.

Wind siting: Thorndike voters approved the siting ordinance. Fort Kent votes tonight.