Global Dental Operating Light Industry, Growth Purpose And Market Opportuni...
Who We Are - soulwisconsin.org · Coulee”conducted from 2010-2014. As prospec?ve transmission...
12
November 28, 2016 Kellie Kubena Environmental Division USDA Rural Development/Rural U?li?es Service STOP 1510, Rm 5135 1400 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20250 <[email protected]> Re: Mee?ng December 7th, in Barneveld, WI regarding EIS for the Dairyland Power Coopera?ve’s transmission proposal, “Cardinal-Hickory Creek.” Kellie Kubena: We write to you as four of 120 local governments and three conserva?on/environmental groups who request to contribute a great deal of input regarding the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) your agency will be preparing in regard to the proposed Cardinal Hickory Creek 345 kV transmission facility in southwest Wisconsin and northeast Iowa. We are interested in mee?ng with you in person to learn more about specific data points you hope to collect, the resources RUS will be able dedicate to the EIS and how to provide informa?on to you most effec?vely and efficiently. We believe there is great common interest in sieng down and going over some important but lesser known recorded documents from a companion 345 kV transmission proposal, “Badger- Coulee”conducted from 2010-2014. As prospec?ve transmission builders receive opportuni?es to present materials suppor?ng their posi?ons for the EIS, we request the same opportunity and hope do this efficiently and with knowledge of your goals. We would like to propose mee?ng with you on or near December 7 th when RUS , SWCA Environmental and other consultants will be on hand for the public scoping mee?ng in Barneveld, Wisconsin. Who We Are Our delega?on represents four of 120 municipali?es in Wisconsin concerned about soaring electricity costs and increasing adverse impacts on rural and urban local economies and lands from high voltage transmission expansion and other capital u?lity investments. These municipal governments,
Transcript of Who We Are - soulwisconsin.org · Coulee”conducted from 2010-2014. As prospec?ve transmission...
November28,2016KellieKubenaEnvironmentalDivisionUSDARuralDevelopment/RuralU?li?esServiceSTOP1510,Rm51351400IndependenceAve.,SWWashington,DC20250<[email protected]>
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<[email protected]>
SommerEnergy,AnnaSommer<[email protected]>
TheRegulatoryAssistanceProject,JanineMigden-Ostrander,<mailto:[email protected]>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
