Build It and They Will Come: Transmission Siting Challenges

< Back to Session Summaries List

The Honorable Garry Brown, Chairman of the New York Public Service Commission, presided as moderator of the session.

The Honorable Phyllis A. Reha, Vice Chair of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MNPUC), stated there was a real need for more transmission in the Midwest region. She contended that there is a significant need for a major expansion of transmission in the U.S. generally. This process requires extensive stakeholder involvement and MNPUC considers landowner, environmental, and economic factors when approving all transmission projects. Any approved transmission project must meet the needs of the local community and be deemed necessary. Further accelerating the need for new transmission, Minnesota has instituted a Renewable Portfolio Standard that requires 25 percent of the State's electricity to come from renewable energy resources by 2025.

T. Graham Edwards, Chief Executive Officer of the Midwest Independent System Operator, believes policymakers and industry should be a focus on infrastructure — not just transmission. He said that it is difficult to site transmission without knowing where future generation will be sited. Robust regional planning, cost recovery, and cost allocation are the key issues in transmission, in Mr. Edwards' opinion.

Sandra Hochstetter, Vice President of Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation, indicated that the key issues in transmission are robust regional planning, coordinated regional effort in generation, transmission, demand response, energy efficiency, quantifying the process of transmission siting, and maintaining a balanced judicial decision-making process.

Linda Ceylor, Vice President of Save Our Unique Lands, focused on incentivizing people to support transmission projects, where they make sense and do not jeopardize land and landowners. Ms. Ceylor contended that transmission projects must benefit local communities that are affected by new transmission lines. Local energy efficiency development and other conservation measures should also be considered to mitigate some of the need for new transmission.

Chairman Brown asked the panelists to discuss the implications of state versus federal authority in transmission including the impact of having an area be designated as a National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (NIETC), per the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provisions. The panelists agreed that transmission is a state issue and Ms. Hochstetter commented that there is often no need for NIETC to be involved unless there is a problem in the siting negotiation process between states. Mr. Edwards commented that collaboration is key to solving transmission siting issues at the state and regional level.

Chairman Brown asked Ms. Hochstetter and Commissioner. Reha how they cope with local opposition to a transmission project if there is no direct benefit to the community. Commissioner Reha responded that educating consumers about the broad societal benefit is one tactic to deal with opposition. Additionally, projects need to have profit-sharing or investment opportunities for the local community. Ms. Hochstetter indicated that cost-benefit analysis is key in dealing with local opposition and that there are individuals who will never be supportive of certain transmission projects because of emotional and aesthetic reasons.

Chairman Brown then asked the panel if the system is more or less reliable as transmission increases and "stretches." Mr. Edwards believes that distance can be handled reliably and transmission expansion improves overall reliability. Ms. Ceylor responded that human error can cause problems as transmission stretches and it is impossible to control all variables.

Chairman Brown asked panelists how to coordinate local, state, regional, and federal planning. Ms. Hochstetter commented that she is an advocate of the regional transmission operator (RTO) system and believes it provides a middle ground for stakeholder involvement.