Six SEA Public Forums Set Around the State
“Energy 2010”: Wisconsin’s Draft Strategic Energy Assessment

On April 15, 2004, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin released “Energy 2010”, a draft version of the state’s Strategic Energy Assessment (SEA). This is the third SEA, a biennial evaluation of the adequacy and reliability of the state’s current and future electrical supply, this draft covering the period 2004-2010. Several key indications found in Energy 2010 include:
peak electric demand is expected to continue to grow at about 2.5% each year (equal to adding one major power plant in the state every two years);
there should be an adequate and reliable source of energy to meet energy demand though 2010 (the utilities’ significant electric generation building plans are the main reason);
coal and nuclear fuel sources will continue to provide the bulk of Wisconsin’s electricity through 2010. However, renewable energy sources will impact Wisconsin’s energy fuel mix as utilities tap new renewable resources to meet the statutory requirement that 2.2% of their retail sales come from renewable energy sources by 2010;
congestion and operational constraints are the principal challenges facing Wisconsin’s electric transmission system. Other challenges include regional and federal transmission requirements; and
although Wisconsin’s electric rates are competitive, there will continue to be upward pressure on rates to help meet reliability and environmental standards.

The PSC has scheduled six public forums for the public to learn about the draft SEA in May and June, all scheduled for 7-9 p.m.: Mon., May 3 in Eau Claire; Wed., May 5 in La Crosse; Wed., May 12 in Madison; Wed., May 26 in Green Bay; Tue., June 1 in Milwaukee; and Thur., June 3 in Stevens Point. At these forums, the PSC will provide a computer modeling session to help citizens see how different energy alternatives impact the environment, reliability and rates, followed by a panel of local citizens representing consumers, businesses and utilities who will discuss local energy needs.

For a copy of the 190 page draft SEA, a public summary, a comment form and a detailed list of public forum locations, dial up the PSC website (http://psc.wi.gov) and look for the “SEA 2010” hotlink on the left side.

Back to the top

APPA Washington Report
Top Tens
by Robert Varela, Editor, APPA’s Public Power Weekly

“What is it about public power?”

That question from a reporter was prompted by a series of “Top 10” lists of green pricing programs in 2003 compiled by the Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Public power utilities again accounted for a disproportionately large share of the spots in the NREL lists.

The leader in sales of renewable energy—by an enormous margin over the next utility on the list—was Austin Energy in Texas, number 82 on the Energy Information Administration’s list of the 100 largest utilities by sales. Austin Energy sold more than 289 million kilowatt-hours of renewable energy in 2003. That is over 50% more than the 188 million kWh sold by the next utility on the list, Portland General Electric. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District in California was third in sales of green power (and 85th on EIA’s 100 largest list). Also making NREL’s top 10 in renewable energy sales were the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (sixth) and Tennessee Valley Authority (seventh).

Public power scored even better on two other NREL top 10 lists, one for customer participation in green power programs and one for lowest premium charged for new, customer-driven renewable power. 

Led by Austin Energy, public power utilities dominated the list of utilities charging the lowest premiums—eight out of 10 spots. Other public power utilities on the low price list were Clallam County, Wash., Public Utility District; Roseville Electric (California); SMUD; Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency; Emerald People’s Utility District (Oregon); American Municipal Power-Ohio; and Eugene, Ore., Water and Electric Board.

Public power utilities made up the top three and six of the top 10 in customer participation rate, led by Lenox Municipal Utilities in Iowa (11.1% of its customers)—even though Lenox only started its Green City Energy program in 2003. Palo Alto Utilities in California, which also started its Palo Alto Green program in 2003, was second in the nation. Other public power utilities on the customer participation list were Moorhead, Minn., Public Service (third); Montezuma, Iowa, Municipal Power & Light (fifth); Fairbank, Iowa (seventh); and SMUD (eighth).

Even in one area where large investor-owned utilities might expect to dominate—total number of customers participating in a green power program—public power did well. LADWP ranked second in the nation in number of participants in a green power program, even though it’s only number 18 on an Energy Information Administration list of the 100 largest utilities by number of customers. Other public power utilities making NREL’s top 10 for total number of green power customers were SMUD (59 on the EIA list), Austin Energy (89th on the EIA list) and TVA.

At about the same time that NREL released its top 10 lists, the National Arbor Day Foundation announced that 114 electric utilities that earned the distinction of “2004 Tree Line USA Utility.” Almost half (54, or 47%) of the 114 are public power utilities and 41 of them also participate in APPA’s national tree-planting effort, TREE POWER. APPA has recognized 67 utilities from 20 states with its Golden Tree Award, given to TREE POWER participants that have planted one tree per customer.

For anyone who thinks TREE POWER is just a “feel good” exercise or a chance for local politicians to get their picture in the paper planting a tree—think again. The city of Rocky Mount, N.C., has planted approximately 58,000 trees through its tree-planting program. JEA, the municipal utility serving Jacksonville, Fla., has planted an estimated 320,000 trees since its program began in 1993.

In another example of public power utilities stepping up on environmental issues, four out of the five utilities that were the first U.S. participants in a World Wildlife Fund initiative to increase energy efficiency and sell more renewable energy by 2020. Additionally, the utilities, Austin Energy in Texas, Burlington Electric Department in Vermont, FPL Group Inc. in Florida, Sacramento Municipal Utility District in California, and Waverly Light and Power in Iowa, agreed to support policies that set binding limits on national emissions of carbon dioxide.

“We are proud today to be among the nation’s leaders in conservation and renewables,” Austin Energy Vice President Roger Duncan said at a Feb. 11 press briefing on the WWF initiative. By 2020, Austin Energy plans to get 20% of its total energy supply from renewables, with an additional 15% being met by energy efficiency measures, said Duncan. 

Public power’s record is all the more remarkable when you consider that investor-owned utilities get a tax break as an incentive to produce renewable power while public power utilities and rural electric cooperatives have to try to persuade the Energy Dept. and Congress every year to ante up some money for what was intended to be an equivalent incentive, the Renewable Energy Production Incentive payment program.

Promoting renewables clearly makes sense, given concerns over air pollution and global warming and the possibility that the United States may become as dependent on foreign sources of liquefied natural gas as it already is on foreign sources of oil.

Virtually ignoring 25% of the electricity industry (public power and co-ops) when it comes to promoting renewables clearly makes no sense, particularly when 15% of the industry (public power) has proven it provides more bang for the buck. 

It’s time for Congress to approve a truly equivalent incentive for non-profit utilities to produce renewable power, be it tradable tax credits or some other reliable mechanism.

File Reports Using PSC’s New Electronic Regulatory Filing System
Wisconsin Administrative Code PSC Chap. 113 Reporting Requirements

The PSC’s new electronic regulatory filing system applies to all reporting requirements within Wisconsin Administrative Code Chap. PSC 113 (Service Rules for Electrical Utilities). All reports should be filed with the PSC in electronic form according to the instructions and guidelines found on the PSC’s ERF website at http://psc.wi.gov/a_erf_public/default.aspx. All PSC 113 reporting requirements should be filed under the docket number 05-GF-113, with the subject box indicating the subsections of PSC 113 the report falls under. If you have questions, please contact the PSC’s Records Management Unit at 608/261-8524 or pscrecs@psc.state.wi.us.

Back to the top

2003-2004 MEUW Legislative Scorecard
by Scott Meske, MEUW Governmental Affairs Director

Every legislative session, MEUW supports and opposes legislation proposed at the State Legislature, based on direction from the MEUW Legislative & Regulatory Committee. Now that the Legislature is about to adjourn for the session, how did we do? Here is a summary of the past legislative session’s important bills and results.

Bills MEUW Supported
Senate Bill 180/Assembly Bill 378 – revamps utility aid payments to communities for hosting new generation and transmission facilities. Signed into law July 29, 2003 (2003 Wis Act 31).
Assembly Bill 394/Senate Bill 194 – allows the American Transmission Company to withdraw from the Midwest Independent System Operator (MISO) under PSC approval. Signed into law August 11, 2003 (2003 Wis Act 40).
Senate Bill 300/Assembly Bill 632 – streamlines PSC/DNR approval processes for generation and transmission facilities. Signed into law December 3, 2003 (2003 Wis Act 89).
Assembly Bill 843 – “environmental trust” legislation introduced at the request of WE Energies, supported by MEUW and the Customers First! Coalition (CFC). Signed into law March 15, 2004 (2003 Wis Act 152).
Senate Bill 8 – an important post 9/11 bill allowing utilities to withhold certain security information from public inspection. MEUW worked with Sen. Rob Cowles (R-Green Bay), the Wisconsin Rural Water Association and other major utilities; the bill passed the Legislature, but came under intense opposition from newspaper editors across Wisconsin. Awaiting Governor Doyle’s signature or veto.
  Senate Bill 113 – “Energy Impact Assessments” can be ordered for any legislation or agency rule that could impact electric reliability in Wisconsin, a common sense issue, supported by wide range of groups. Signed into law April 16, 2004 (2003 Wis Act 277).

Bills MEUW Opposed
Assembly Bill 136 – regarding powers of certain towns and authorizing the creation of charter towns by certain town boards. Passed by Rural Affairs Com-mittee but was not scheduled for a full Assembly vote.
Senate Bill 228 – prohibiting the use of local governmental resources to promote or defeat a referendum. MEUW opposed this legislation along with several other groups. Passed by Senate Education, Ethics & Elections Committee, but not scheduled for full Senate vote.
Senate Bill 272/Assembly Bill 588 – written at the request of the incumbent telecommunications and cable television providers; was the subject of much debate whether restrictions would unnecessarily limit and inhibit municipal telecom utilities. MEUW, the League of Wisconsin Municipalities the Wisconsin Alliance of Cities, the Wisconsin Counties Association and the Citizens Utility Board opposed the bill, however, it ultimately passed the Legislature. MEUW and others were unsuccessful in requesting a veto from Governor Doyle. Signed into law April 16, 2004 (2003 Wis Act 278).

Additionally, MEUW monitored several other bills that didn’t make it through the legislative process. They include: AB 135 (electronic government); AB 529 (stray voltage); AB 774 (utility aid payments to communities for existing plants); SB 112 (regulation of commercial lighting); SB 280 (public benefits); and others. To view the entire list of MEUW’s position on bills considered during the 2003-2004 Legislature, visit the Wisconsin Ethics Board website (http://ethics.state.wi.us).

Back to the top

Chain Saw Safety
By Steve Hedden, MEUW Safety Director

The chain saw is a vital tool that our utilities use to maintain line clearance from tree contact. It is however the most dangerous tool linemen use. If linemen are not following safe work procedures while using a chain saw on the job, the results can be tragic for the employee, their family and the utility. 

The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics recently rated the ten most dangerous jobs in the country. It was determined by figuring the fatality rate per 100,000 workers. Timber cutter was rated the number one most dangerous job in the U.S. with a fatality rate of 117.8 workers per 100,000. Number six on the list was electrical power installer at 32.5 worker fatalities per 100,000. When you consider that linemen, who already do the sixth most dangerous job, are trimming and cutting trees, which is the most dangerous job, it is imperative that they follow safe work procedures while using a chain saw.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission completed a study of chain saw accidents in 2000 and found that there were 28,500 chain saw accidents reported in 1999. The average chain saw injury requires 110 stitches and the average medical cost was $12,000. Based on these figures it was estimated that the annual medical cost for chain saw injuries in the United State was $350 million dollars per year. Worker’s compensation costs, based on the assumption that four weeks recovery is required can be estimated at $125 million dollars annually. Given these statistics and the potential for serious injury, the MEUW Safety & Job Training Program has made chain saw safety a priority by providing instruction annually pertaining to the proper usage of a chain saw, and required PPE, during safety sessions. Along with the annual class-room training, MEUW has offered Tree Trimming Workshops bi-annually for a number of years, which also feature chain saw safety along with tree trimming techniques.

The first step in chain saw safety is to make sure all employees that are required to use a chain saw on the job are properly trained in their safe use. Next, you want to make sure they are utilizing the proper personal protective equipment including: hard hat, safety glasses, face shield, hearing protection, work gloves, and steel toe boots. In addition if they are using a chain saw on the ground they are required to wear cut-resistant chaps and cut-resistant foot wear. These cut-resistant protective items have multiple layers of ballistic nylon. When a chain saw comes in contact with them it pulls the strands of ballistic nylon out, which in turn jams up the saw and stops it in a fraction of a second.

Lastly, it is imperative that proper techniques are used when operating a chain saw. The most common misuse of a chain saw involves operating it with one hand. Some chain saw manufacturers have unfortunately made their saws balanced to make it easier to use one-handed, even though they state that it is not to be used that way. You have to use both hands on a chain saw to have proper control of it. The right hand should be holding the rear handle firmly and the left hand should be holding the upper handle directly behind the chain brake with the thumb wrapped around it, to maintain control of the saw during use. 

By following safe work practices, which includes proper usage of the saw and the use of all required PPE, you or your employees can prevent becoming a statistic and, even worse, tragically injured!

Back to the top

June 9-11 in Oconomowoc
MEUW 75th Annual Conference

Mark your calendars for June 9-11! MEUW’s 75th Annual Conference will be held at the Olympia Resort in Oconomowoc. We have reserved a block of sleeping rooms at the Olympia; make your reservations now (800/558-9573) for best selection, and at the very latest by Friday, May 14, after which the room holds will terminate. Be sure to ask for the “Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin” room block to receive the$108 single/double rate. 

The Olympia now offers Wi-Fi Internet access in most of their sleeping rooms. In order to use it, your laptop computer will need either an internal Centrino card or an external USB or PC card. USB cards may be rented from the Olympia for $10. If you plan to use this amenity, be sure to ask for a room with Wi-Fi access when you make your reservation and when you check in.

Conference highlights this year include APPA Chair Glenn Cannon speaking on challenges faced by public power systems; a presentation by Janine Moon of CompassPoint Coaching regarding employee recruitment, training and retention; a presentation/update by PSC Chair Burnie Bridge; a presentation by Harry Terhune of American Transmission Company regarding the U.S. Department of Energy’s final report on the August 14 blackout; a presentation on MISO “Day-2” market developments by Gary Mathis of MG&E; and more!

The 9th Annual MEUW Golf Outing will be on Wednesday morning (June 9), with a shotgun start and a brat cookout The fee is $54.00 and must be paid in advance. The deadline for golf registration and payment is May 28. MEUW Associate Members will host their traditional trade show and social hour on Wednesday afternoon (June 9). The trade show will include the presentation of Golf Awards.

Your utility should have already received the Annual Conference registration materials packet. If you need another copy, call MEUW Office Manager Linda Olson (608/837-2263) or visit the “Events & Meetings” page of www.meuw.org. For more information on the Olympia Resort & Spa, visit www.olympiaresort.com.

Back to the top