Bid To Speed New Power Lines Angers Landowners And Greens
Friday October 17, 10:02 am ET
By Sean Higgins
The Northeast's massive blackout in August was a wake-up call to the government, utilities and consumers that the
nation's electricity grid needs to be improved.
But even with broad agreement on the problem, plans to address it have generated heavy opposition, often creating
strange bedfellows.
As Congress closes in on a broad energy bill
estimated at $53 billion, one of the many issues
still up in the air is whether to give the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission backstop
authority to site new transmission lines.
In other words, it would let the federal
government seize private property to set up
power lines.
Fans of backstop authority say it is a regrettable
but necessary element of the energy bill. Without
it, it could take years to site transmission lines due
to bureaucracy, nimbyism and opposition from
green groups.
And if you can't transmit the power, what's the
point?
Gridlock
Hogwash, says an odd alliance of local government, land rights and green groups. This is just a giveaway to
corporations, they say.
"Big utility companies want to be able to push private property owners aside," said Mike Hardiman, president of the
conservative American Land Rights Association.
Backstop authority was originally expected to be a key part of the final bill. It was included in the House version, and
chief Senate Republican negotiator Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has indicated Senate conferees will accept it, too.
But it's become an issue in conference. Critics of backstop authority haven't given up, and even fans say they'll forego
it if it holds up the rest of the bill.
"We keep going around and around on this," said Brian Kennedy, spokesman for conferee Rep. Richard Pombo,
R-Calif.
Under current law, states have sole jurisdiction over where to build new transmission lines. If needed, they can even
invoke their "eminent domain" powers to take private property for that purpose.
With most transmission systems interconnected at a regional, multi-state level, the process can be subject to numerous
delays ranging from interstate disputes to local, grass-roots objections.
Speeding Up Power Lines
"It can take up to 12 years to site a transmission line," said one utilities industry lobbyist. "For the greater good, there's
got to be a way to get it done faster."
The idea has been kicking around for a while. It got a boost after August's power blackout.
Last month, FERC Chairman Pat Wood put it on a wish list of infrastructure improvements for the interstate
transmission grid.
"Providing FERC . . . with backstop transmission siting authority for certain backbone transmission lines, in the event
a state or local entity does not have authority to act or does not act in a timely manner, may address this important
concern," he said at a congressional hearing.
The energy bill would do that by letting FERC step in and site a power line if a state has delayed final approval for over
a year.
The bill includes language to compensate landowners for seized property and return the property if it isn't used for a
transmission line.
Fans of backstop authority say it's a last resort when the process gets bogged down.
"States would still be the main authority, but FERC would act like an appeals court," said one source close to the issue.
This would prod states to act faster, the source said.
Utilities lobbyists note FERC already has this power regarding natural gas pipelines. So it would not be unprecedented,
they say.
Even Rep. Pombo, a fan of landowner rights, favors it. The "aggregate good" of the nation demands it, said his
spokesman.
That's not good enough for the National Governors Association, which says it tramples state authority. Or for the
Sierra Club, which thinks there are enough transmission lines already. Or private property owners, who stand to lose
their land.
This odd coalition has united against its common foe: the federal government.
"What you're talking about is the federal government being able to take people's property away," said Charles Gray,
spokesman for the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.
The irony, says Hardiman, is that in many places the federal government has the land it needs - public land. But
utilities aren't looking at that.
"Big business took the easy way out," he said. Instead of taking on green groups to put power lines on public lands, he
says, utilities are going after private landowners.
"There's no need for this," he said. "The big utilities already have a big advantage over property owners: money and
lawyers."
The issue will likely be settled soon. After struggling for weeks in conference, lawmakers have made progress on several
fronts on the overall energy bill this week.
Congressional Republican leaders said Thursday they'll personally step in and work out a deal if conferees can't resolve
the remaining issues. Votes in the full House and Senate may follow next week.
biz.yahoo.com |
