$420 Million Approved to Build 220 Mile Line
Wausau-Duluth Transmission Project Approved by PSC

On December 15, Public Service Commission Chair Burnie Bridge and Commissioners Robert Garvin and Ave Bie voted unanimously to approve the construction of the Arrowhead-Weston transmission line. The 220-mile line connecting Duluth, MN to Wausau, WI was originally approved in October 2001 but later brought back for PSC approval in November 2002 due to an increased cost estimate. 

The line will be the first high voltage transmission line built in Wisconsin in over 30 years. It will reinforce the state’s electric infrastructure and substantially reduce serious constraints on the King-Arpin transmission line – Wisconsin’s only 345 kV connection from the west, and one of the four most constrained interstate power connections in the country according to the U.S. Department of Energy. “The line will significantly improve the state’s electric security, enabling the state’s transmission system to withstand outages due to lightning, mechanical problems or other unplanned events,” said Forrest Ceel, President of IBEW Local 2150.

As part of this proceeding, the PSC’s independent auditor thoroughly assessed the cost estimates for the project and determined them reasonable. “Wisconsin has some very serious [electric] reliability concerns,” said Bridge. “Reinforcements are needed and they are needed now,” added Bie. “I believe as strongly as I did two years ago that we need a solution now,” said Garvin, adding that “we’ve been studying this since 1997” when the Eau-Claire-Arpin line failed.

“This sorely needed addition to Wisconsin’s infrastructure will improve access to low cost power in the region and help keep electricity affordable,” said David J. Benforado, MEUW Executive Director. “It will help ensure Wisconsin businesses have the reliable power they need to prosper and expand.” 

While legal challenges are expected from opponents to the line, and approvals must still be sought from various counties along the route and the National Parks Service for the line to cross the Namekagon River, it is expected to be energized and in service by 2008.

Back to the top

Regulatory Approval Process Improved
by Scott Meske, MEUW Governmental Affairs Director

In an effort to help Wisconsin improve its over-burdened transmission grid and lack of new electric generation, a new law aims to streamline the regulatory approval process for new transmission and generation projects. Governor Doyle recently signed Senate Bill 300 (Wisconsin Act 89) into law was the result of Doyle, Senator Rob Cowles (R-Green Bay) and Rep. Scott Jensen (R-Waukesha) working together for months to develop legislation and rules streamlining the regulatory approval process for energy facilities in Wisconsin. 

Presently it takes about 3-5 years to approve and build a gas-fired power plant, 5-7 years for a coal-fired power plant and 7-9 years for a new major transmission line. The legislation passed the Assembly 80-15 and the Senate 30-2 in November and was signed into law by Governor Doyle on December 4.

MEUW Executive Director David J. Benforado said municipal electric utilities and their customers will benefit from an expedited approval process for new generation and transmission. “When delays occur in the approval process either at the PSC or the DNR, costs tend to go up,” said Benforado. “This new effort will try and eliminate costly delays in the process. That’s good for everyone in Wisconsin.”

The new rules dramatically reduce the time needed to approve and build critical energy facilities by: 1) coordinating the reviews of the DNR and PSC; 2) placing tight deadlines on the time available for these reviews; and 3) tailoring the thoroughness of the review to the scope of the project. Presently, Wisconsin requires a full environmental and energy review for a company seeking to upgrade their existing power lines or even one just proposing to string another power line on existing towers. This expensive process will be replaced with a short expedited review for upgrades and a 30-day administrative signoff for new lines on existing towers. Major projects will still require the highest level of review and the public will be given an earlier opportunity for input in the permitting decision.

Reaction to the passage and signing of the bill was positive on both sides of the aisle. Sen. Robert Cowles (R-Green Bay), one of the principal authors of the measure said, “Energy reliability for Wisconsin is something both sides of the aisle can agree on. In the future I am looking to improve conservation and efficiency measures, as well as address long term planning for Wisconsin’s energy demand.”

The time saved under this legislation should speed the development of the energy facilities our economy will need and produce considerable savings for Wisconsin's energy users. 

“This measure will enable us to build and maintain a modern, reliable electric transmission grid for Wisconsin’s families and our economy,” Governor Doyle said. “And it is another example of how we can reach across party lines to do what’s right for Wisconsin. By working together, we can deliver the electricity our state needs to promote growth and create high skill, high wage jobs for our citizens. And I hope we can continue in the spirit of bipartisanship, because creating jobs isn’t a Democratic or Republican thing to do, it’s the right thing to do.”

Back to the top

Federal Energy Bill Pending in the Senate

While some say it is on life-support with limited chances of passage, the federal energy bill is still pending in the U.S. Senate. Here’s an update on this important bill.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed the comprehensive energy bill, the Energy Policy Act of 2003, on Nov. 18 (on a vote of 246﷓180), with all eight members from Wisconsin opposing the bill’s passage. The massive 1,100﷓page bill features an electricity restructuring title amid a host of energy﷓related provisions, and carries a price tag of $32 billion over 10 years, including some $23.5 billion in tax breaks.

A few days later on Nov. 21, the bill stalled in the U.S. Senate. After Senate GOP leaders unexpectedly fell two votes short of the 60 votes needed to pass a cloture motion which would have cut off a filibuster, Majority Leader Bill Frist, R﷓Tenn., decided to put off a final vote on the bill until sometime early next year. Both of Wisconsin’s Senators, Senators Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold, opposed the cloture motion. Senate leaders, including Frist and Pete Domenici, R﷓N.M., chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Bush administration officials said they would push for enactment of the legislation next year. One key issue was the bill’s retroactive liability protection for manufacturers of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline additive that has contaminated groundwater in at least 28 states.

The Senate will reconvene Jan. 20. However, it’s generally conceded that it could be harder to pass the energy bill in 2004, an election year, when political pressure and partisan differences increase. There’s also the “house of cards” problem—touch any particular provision and the whole thing could come tumbling down. 

Supporters are hoping to pick up some votes during the hiatus from a combination of high winter prices for natural gas and heating oil, the expiration of production tax credits for renewable energy and Midwestern senators getting an earful from constituents upset over the loss of the bill’s ethanol mandate. 

APPA expressed support for the legislation. In a Nov. 17 letter to Domenici, who chaired the House﷓Senate conference committee, APPA President and CEO Alan Richardson said, “While we cannot support every provision, we recognize that your mark is a carefully crafted package.” The energy bill includes a number of provisions important for public power utilities, Richardson said:

• the service obligation/native load language that “equally preserves the existing firm transmission rights of transmission owners and transmission-dependent utilities;” 
• “FERC lite” language limiting FERC’s jurisdiction over consumer-owned utilities that own transmission;
• national mandatory grid reliability standards;
• reform of procedures for licensing and relicensing hydroelectric projects; and 
• reauthorization of the Renewable Energy Production Incentive program.

On the other hand, APPA is “very disappointed” that the final bill did not include tradable tax credits for not-for-profit utilities that produce electricity through clean and renewable generation,” Richardson said. Domenici and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, pledged to continue to work to enact an alternative to tradable tax credits, such as an appropriated payments program similar to REPI. 

The bill’s provisions on use of participant funding for new transmission “may well run counter to the bill’s goal of expanding the transmission grid and ¼ may provide opportunities for transmission providers to discriminate against transmission﷓dependent publicly owned utilities,” Richardson said.

It is not clear if dropping the MTBE waiver would swing enough votes in the Senate. Many critics have significant objections to various other parts of the bill, notably its cost and costly special interest provisions. Overcoming a point of order based on the bill’s high price tag could prove more difficult than a vote to limit debate.

Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-NM) has said that he is “not confident of anything, but we'll leave no stone unturned” to find the votes. Domenici is warning his Senate colleagues that he is not amenable to passing portions of the bill separately (e.g. the reliability title, extension of tax credits for wind energy and other renewables) and that he will insist that the bill remain comprehensive. “I'm not going to be a piecemeal patsy,” Domenici told trade press recently.

Back to the top

MEUW Workshop and Seminar Opportunities in February!

Look for registration information to be mailed to your utility or check at www.meuw.org on the Internet and click on “Major Events & Meetings”

PSC Chapter 119 Workshop
February 9, 2004, Rain Tree Resort, Wisconsin Dells
Cost -$40.00

Have you heard about the Wisconsin Public Service Commission’s new administrative rules on interconnecting distributed generation to your utilities distribution system? Do you know what distributed generation is? Would you know what to do if one of your customers knocked on your door tomorrow and told you they were going to install a distributed generation facility that would be interconnected to your system?

If you don’t know the answers to these questions, this MEUW informational workshop on the new PSC Chapter 119 is for you! Instructors will include Paul Helgeson of the Public Service Commission Electric Division, Jake Oelke of WPPI, and Larry Kromm of L&S Technical Associates.

Your utility should have already received registration materials for this workshop. If you need another copy, call MEUW or check www.meuw.org.

MEUW Watthour Meter Workshop
February 17-20, 2004, Wisconsin Public Service, Green Bay
Cost - $340

This popular workshop is being offered for the eighth year in conjunction with WPS. The workshop’s popularity is due to the knowledge and experience of Wisconsin Public Service Meter personnel who serve as instructors and the quality, “hands-on” instruction provided to attendees. 

Each attendee will have the opportunity to determine the proper metering equipment for a given customer service and then wire the meter installation. The installations are then critiqued and verified by WPS meter personnel. 

This is just a sample of the topics to be covered at this workshop. This is a must-attend workshop for personnel involved in meter installations. Early registration is recommended, as attendance is limited to 45.

10-Hour OSHA Course for Electric Utilities
February 24-25, 2004, Rain Tree Resort, Wisconsin Dells
Cost - $175

The 10-hour OSHA Course will provide participants with 1-½ days of intensive review of current OSHA standards that are specific to the electric utility industry. This is the only course of this type in the country that is approved by OSHA. Pam Tompkins of SET Solutions of Ballentine, South Carolina, who designed this course, is the instructor. The cost for this course is normally over $200, but it is being offered to our members for $175. 

As you probably already know, Wisconsin’s municipals do not fall under OSHA jurisdiction; however Wisconsin Department of Commerce does enforce all current OSHA standards, which makes it a must for you to be knowledgeable of safety rules that apply to your utility. Those that are recommended to attend this seminar include: managers, superintendents, foremen, safety committee members, and employees who have safety responsibilities.

Back to the top

Eye Protection In the Workplace
by Dean Larson, MEUW Safety Director

Do you wear your safety glasses at all times? Or are you like countless others around the country who find an excuse not to wear them? Some common excuses are: they make me sweat, they fog up, I don’t have my peripheral vision, just to name a few. The fact is every day an estimated 1,000 eye injuries occur in American workplaces. The financial cost of these injuries is more than $300 million per year. No dollar figure can adequately reflect the personal toll these accidents take on the injured workers.

What contributes to eye injuries at work? Not wearing eye protection is the leading cause. Three out of every five workers injured were not wearing any eye protection at the time of the accident. Wearing the wrong kind of protection also contributes to injuries. The most common cause of injuries while wearing protection is from wearing glasses with no side shields. Wearing glasses with side shields may not be stylish but what is more important, your vision or how you look? An accident that happened at an MEUW member utility earlier this year was caused by not wearing safety glasses. The employee was working inside and only had tinted glasses so he did not wear them. The result? A small piece of metal blew into his eye. With regard to side shields, a few years ago I had a minor eye injury from a small sliver of wood that blew into my eye because I didn’t have side shields on my prescription glasses.

What causes eye injuries? Flying particles is the main factor. Almost 70% of accidents result from flying or falling objects. Contact with chemicals causes one-fifth of the injuries. Other accidents were caused by objects swinging from a fixed position, such as tree limbs, ropes, chains, or tools which were pulled into the eye while the worker was using them.

Eye protection works and is inexpensive. Non prescription safety glasses range from $5-$10 a pair. An eye can be destroyed in a fraction of a second but can be saved by proper safety glasses. We have all heard the expression “you only have one set of eyes”. Take care of the set you have by wearing your eye protection at all times.

Back to the top