November28,2016KellieKubenaEnvironmentalDivisionUSDARuralDevelopment/RuralU?li?esServiceSTOP1510,Rm51351400IndependenceAve.,SWWashington,DC20250<Kellie.Kubena@wdc.usda.gov>

Re:Mee?ngDecember7th,inBarneveld,WIregardingEISfortheDairylandPowerCoopera?ve’stransmissionproposal,“Cardinal-HickoryCreek.”

KellieKubena:

Wewritetoyouasfourof120localgovernmentsandthreeconserva?on/environmentalgroupswhorequesttocontributeagreatdealofinputregardingtheEnvironmentalImpactStatement(EIS)youragencywillbepreparinginregardtotheproposedCardinalHickoryCreek345kVtransmissionfacilityinsouthwestWisconsinandnortheastIowa.Weareinterestedinmee?ngwithyouinpersontolearnmoreaboutspecificdatapointsyouhopetocollect,theresourcesRUSwillbeablededicatetotheEISandhowtoprovideinforma?ontoyoumosteffec?velyandefficiently.

Webelievethereisgreatcommoninterestinsiengdownandgoingoversomeimportantbutlesserknownrecordeddocumentsfromacompanion345kVtransmissionproposal,“Badger-Coulee”conductedfrom2010-2014.Asprospec?vetransmissionbuildersreceiveopportuni?estopresentmaterialssuppor?ngtheirposi?onsfortheEIS,werequestthesameopportunityandhopedothisefficientlyandwithknowledgeofyourgoals.Wewouldliketoproposemee?ngwithyouonornearDecember7thwhenRUS,SWCAEnvironmentalandotherconsultantswillbeonhandforthepublicscopingmee?nginBarneveld,Wisconsin.

WhoWeAre

Ourdelega?onrepresentsfourof120municipali?esinWisconsinconcernedaboutsoaringelectricitycostsandincreasingadverseimpactsonruralandurbanlocaleconomiesandlandsfromhighvoltagetransmissionexpansionandothercapitalu?lityinvestments.Thesemunicipalgovernments,

includingeightcoun?es(figure1),haveformallype??onedtheWIPSCtoconductcomprehensiveanalysisofnon-transmissionalterna?vesforallhighcapacitytransmissionexpansionproposals.

Wearejoinedinthisinterac?onwithourstatePSCandthetransmissionlinebuildersbyenvironmentalandci?zengroupsincludingtheDriilessAreaLandConservancy,EnvironmentalLawandPolicyCenter,DriilessDefendersandS.O.U.L.ofWisconsin.

DavidGiffey,EnergyPlanningAdvisor,TownofArena,IowaCountyJohnHessChair,TownofWyoming,IowaCountyDavidStanfield,EnergyPlanningAdvisoryCommimee,TownofVermont,DaneCountyLaurieandRichardGraney,TownofLima,GrantCountyBarbaraGrenlie,Chair,TownofVermont,DaneCountyRobDanielson,EnergyPlanning&Informa?onCommimee,TownofStark,VernonCountyDavidClumer,DriilessAreaLandConservancy,Dane,Iowa,Lafaye@eandGrantCounBes

(Consultant:EnvironmentalLawandPolicyCenter)Ka?eMcGrath,DriilessDefendersandformerlegisla?vespecialist,IowaCountyRobDanielson,S.O.U.L.ofWisconsin,sevenchapters,State-wideMichaelMcDermom,VermontCi?zensPowerlineAc?onCommimee,TownofVermont,DaneCounty

WeaskforRUSsupportinmakingsurethatahighlyqualifiedexpertishiredtoconductacomprehensivecost-benefitanalysisofnon-transmissionalternaBvesandtoprovideacomparisonofimpactsonlocaleconomiesfortheEIS.

Thoughthepublicexpressedconsiderableinterestinincludingthoroughanalysisofnon-transmissionalterna?vesintheEISconductedforCapX2020linein2013,thesec?oninthefinalversionisamere172wordsinlength(figure6).TheNEPAstatutoryobliga?ontostudyanddevelopunderstandingsoflowimpactalterna?vesforpublicofficialstoreviewwasdismissedlargelythroughEISadop?onofu?lity-suppliedassump?ons.Theinapplicabilityoftheseassump?onsarenotedinthereferencedfigurewhichwehopetoexplainfurtherwhenconvenient.

Thenon-transmissionalterna?vesthatwerequestbeevaluatedaloneandincombina?onforthecurrentCardinalHickoryCreekEISendeavorinclude:

• Acceleratedandtargetedapplica?onsofenergyefficiencyu?lizingWisconsin’sFocusonEnergyprogramandprogramswithinDairylandPowerCoopera?veandotheru?li?es.

• Acceleratedandtargetedapplica?onsoftheseveraltypesofloadmanagementresources.

• Acceleratedandtargetedapplica?onsofdistributedgenera?onincludingplacementtoremovedemandandprolongthelifespanofthe“reliability”transmissionfacili?esiden?fiedbytheapplicants.

Inthedevelopmentoftheabovealterna?veresources,examinedbothaloneandincombina?on,“accelerated”meansnotbeingrestrictedtocurrentfundinglevelsbutu?lizingfundingamountsequaltothe40yearinclusivecostpassedontoallelectriccustomersforfinancing,construc?on,opera?on,maintenance,usageanddeprecia?onoftheproposedhighvoltagetransmissionop?on.Addi?onally,werequestthatacomparisonoftheeconomicimpactsonpoten?allyaffectedlocaleconomiesbeconducted.Thisstudyshouldaccountfortheimpactslistedbelowintermsofbenefitsandlossesundertwocondi?ons:(1)selectedlocaleconomiesinthepresenceofa345kVdouble-circuit,transmissionfacilityand;(2)thesamelocaleconomieswithoutthetransmissionfacilitybutinfluencedbyop?mizedmixofinvestmentsinnon-transmissionalterna?ves:

• Impactsonpropertyvaluesandthelocaltaxbaseover40years.

• Impactsonthedevelopmentofnewresidencesandbusinesseswithinsightofthepoten?altransmissionfacilityover40yearswithspecialamen?ongiventohousingbuiltorremodeledforre?rementreloca?on.

• Impactsonbusinessespatronizedbytouristsandothersvisi?ngtheareadue,inpart,toamrac?ve,naturalassetsofthearea.Es?mateovera40yearperiod.

• Impactsontheaveragecostofresiden?alandcommercialelectricserviceover40years.

Pleasenotethatshouldthefederal-levelEISforCardinalHickoryCreekfailtoincludetheseassessments,itwouldhavenega?veimpactsonenergyplanningbyseengexampleofinsufficientanalysisfortheu?lityapplicantsandtheWIPSC.Anunder-developedEISalsodetractsfromlocalgovernmentstatutoryrightstoestablishenergypriori?esandassociatedlandusegoals.

Further,wehaveexaminedthe2015EISforatransmissionproposalconductedwithinputfromthecontractedscopingfirm,SWCAEnvironmentalConsultants,anditcontainsnosec?onofcostbenefitanalysisofnon-transmissionalterna?veshmp://bit.ly/SWCA-EIS . TheotherEIS’sSWCAsuggestedweexamineforexamplealsolacksuchassessment:hmp://bit.ly/EIS_2andhmp://bit.ly/EIS_3.

Ourdelega?onhasreceivedresponsesfromtwoenergyconsul?ngfirmsexpressinginterestinconduc?ngtheanalysisofnon-transmissionalterna?vesfortheCardinalHickoryCreekEIS:

SynapseEnergy,BruceBiewald<bbiewald@synapse-energy.com>

SommerEnergy,AnnaSommer<anna@sommerenergy.com>

TheRegulatoryAssistanceProject,JanineMigden-Ostrander,<mailto:JMigden@raponline.org>isinterestedinassis?ngshouldinterpreta?onsofpolicybecomeinvolved.

Background:TheStateofEnergyPlanninginWisconsin

In1998,WisconsinceasedIntegratedResourcePlanning(IRP)marginalizingtheabilityofinvestmentsinacceleratedenergyefficiency,modernloadmanagementanddistributedgenera?ontoonlycompe?ngwithu?lityproposalsonacasebycasebasis,andwithverylimitedfunding.Asaresult,theWIPublicServiceCommissionnolongerconductson-goingenergyplanningwhichhasforcedruralcommuni?esandlocalgovernmentsandstatelawmakerstopressuretheagencytoallowuserside,non-transmissionalterna?vestocompetemorefairlyinthehighvoltagetransmissionreviewprocess.

Withoutcompe??onfromenergyefficiency,loadmanagement,thehighinterest,longtermdebtcreatedbyuncontrolledspendinginhighcapacitytransmissionexpansionandfossilfuelgenera?on,Wisconsin’sratesandfeesarenowthehighestinthemidwest(figure2).Thehigh-capacitytransmissionexpansionproposalforwhichtheRUSwillbepreparinganEISfor,“CardinalHickoryCreek,”wouldbecometheeighthhighcapacityexpansionprojectapprovedinthelasttenyears.Debtonpriortransmissionexpansionspendingnowcons?tutes19%ofatypicalruralelectricbill(figure3).

Ruralcommuni?eswithmunicipalu?li?esincludingthosebuyingpowerfromUSDAloanapplicantDairylandPowerCoopera?ve,paya20%fixedfeechargeinthispowerwhichprofoundlyundercutsthecommuni?esabilitytoinvestinsolar,loadmanagementandenergyefficiency.

TheWIPSChasblockedstatelawmakerrequeststoincreaseourregion-laggingenergyefficiencyinvestments(figure4)andtheuncheckedcapitalu?lityspendingiseffec?velysendingenergydollarsthatshouldremainruraleconomiestothefinanceindustryforpaymentondebt.

RenewingRuralCommunityEngagementandRelevanceforUSDA/RUSElectricProgramLoans

Weaskforyourassistancenotonlybecauseourlocaleconomiesandlands(andelectricitycosts)aredeartousbutbecausewean?cipateitcanreviverelevantdirec?onforElectricProgramloaning.Becauseimprovementsfromenergyefficiency,modernloadmanagementandlocalsolarrequireindividual/communityinvestmenttorealizeenergysavingsandenvironmentalbenefits,theimprovementsuniquelyembodysharedapprecia?onstheREAusedtoenjoy.Incontrast,verycostly,unwarranted,environmentallyunaccountableandimposingtransmissionfacili?estendtoundercutpublictrustintheRUSgoals.

Unliketransmissionaddi?onswhicharechallengedtoguaranteesavingsorenvironmentalbenefits,partneredu?lity/communityNTAinvestmentnotonlyassureslowerelectricbillsandCO2reduc?onsinthequickestandmostcost-effec?veways,butcaneliminatetheprimarysourceofrateandfeesincreases:ballooningcapitalexpenseforreplacementoflowvoltagetransmissionfacili?es.TheRUSmanybefamiliarwiththeReformingEnergyVision(REV)ini?a?veundertheNewYorkPSCwherereplacementofa$1billionsubsta?onwasavoidedusing$200millioninnon-transmissionalterna?ves.InWisconsin,DairylandPowerCoopera?ve(DPC)ispavingasimilarpathaddingload-reducingsolarfacili?esat15agingtransmissionfacili?es:hmp://bit.ly/DPC_substa?on_solar.Atleastthreeofthese

installa?onspartnerwithruraldevelopmentwithcustomersandbusinessesbuying20yearleasesonsolarproduc?onatlessthan$2perwam:hmp://www.rec.coop/content/transi?on-energy-0

Escala?ngruralelectricitycostsinWisconsinmustbechecked.Already,theythreatentheabilityofenergy-intensivebusinessesincludingdairyopera?onstoremaincompe??vewithbusinessesinotherstates.

TheRuralU?lityService’suniqueabilitytoleadtheshiifromrate-pressuringcapitalu?lityinvestmentstoNTA’sisevidentintheagency’sheavyemphasisonreplacementcapitalu?lityspendingintheElectricProgramloansgrantedin2016(figure5).Thebestpossiblewaytheagencycanpromotethenewpathistofulfilltherequestsweposeinthislemertoestablishresponsibleprecedence.

Thecost-effecBvenessandfeasibilityofruralelectricdevelopmentpartneringcommunity/uBlityspendinghasalreadybeendemonstrated.

Acost-benefitanalysisforapriorhighcapacitytransmissionproposalinWisconsinconductedbyPowersEngineering(hmp://bit.ly/Powers_Tes?mony)demonstratedthataone?meinvestmentof$19millionintargetedenergyefficiency,loadmanagementandcommunitysolarsupportatlowvoltagesubsta?onswouldavoidabout$170millioninlowvoltagetransmissionfacilityreplacementcostswhile:

• Stabilizingorloweringelectricbillsintheaffectedfootprintandbeyond• Allowingcustomersandbusinessestoinvestinsolarverycosteffec?vely• Accomodateflowthroughthetransmissionsystemrelievinganyfuturepoten/al

conges?onmoreeffec?velythana345kVtransmissionfacilityataminimalcostof$600million.

Wethankyouforthisopportunitytooutlineourgoals,makeourrequests.Wehopethatyoucansetaside?metomeetwithusinpersonandhelpustakefulladvantageofouropportunitytoprovidescopinginput.

Sincerely,

//SS//

DavidClumerRobDanielsonDavidGiffeyLaurieandRichardGraneyBarbaraGrenlieJohnHessDavidStanfieldMichaelMcDermomKa?eMcGrathChuckTennessen

cc:ChristopherMcLean,AssistantAdministrator,RuralU?li?esServiceU.S.SenatorTammyBaldwinU.S.SenatorRonJohnsonU.S.Representa?veMarkPocanU.S.Representa?veRonKindU.S.SenatorJoniErnst,CommimeeonAgriculture,Nutri?on&ForestryU.S.SenatorCharlesGrassley,CommimeeonAgriculture,Nutri?on&Forestry

FIGURE 1Figure 1

Footnotes - “ It’s our money. Which energy investment path shall we take?”

[5a]WIAverageResidenJalRateisHighestinMidwestin2015https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/state/avgprice_annual.xls

[5b]Only7stateshaveexperiencedelectricitycostincreaseshigherthanWisconsinsince2003.

Since2005whenWisconsinu;li;esbeganaddingchargesforagreatlyenlargedtransmissionsystem,ourelectricityrateshaverankedhighestorsecondhighestintheMidwest.Thoughoncebelowna;onalaverage,by2013onlysevenstatesfacedfasterclimbingratesthanWisconsin’s.[5]

FIGURE 2

This amount would triple WI’s current energy efficiency rebate program

Figure 3

Footnotes - “ It’s our money. Which energy investment path shall we take?”

[6b]WisconsinFocusonEnergySpendingin2007and2012.The2011EnergyEfficiencybudgetwas74%ofthebudgetfortheprogramin2007andin2012itwas81%ofthe2007amount.ProgramspendingintheWisconsiniscloseto$1permonthperresiden;alcustomerwhichislessthanspendinginsurroundingstates.

Source:hUps://www.focusonenergy.com/about/evalua;on-reports

Source:hUp://aceee.org/sites/default/files/publica;ons/researchreports/u1408.pdf

FIGURE 4

$3.6 Billion for RUS Electric Projects in 31 States Funded in 2016

Eight Distributed Generation and Efficiency Projects for Utilities

EdentonSolarLLC(NorthCarolina)$26,000,000for20MWsolarphotovoltaicrenewablefarm.

Plumas-SierraRuralElectricCooperaGve(CaliforniaandNevada)$7,000,000forsolarphotovoltaicrenewableprojects.

SouthMississippiElectricPowerAssociaGon$1,250,000forfivedistributedsolarphotovoltaicrenewableprojects.

SiouxValleyEnergy(SouthDakota,MinnesotaandIowa)$200,000forsolarphotovoltaicrenewableprojects.

WesternIowaPowerCooperaGve$525,000forasolarphotovoltaicrenewablegeneraGonsystem

DixieElectricCooperaGve(Alabama)$684,000forenergyefficiencyprojects.

MidwestEnergyCooperaGve(Michigan,Indiana,Ohio)$1,098,036forenergyefficiencyprojects.

FIGURE 5