Our resident lawyer Cliff Looney, of the mild manner and passion for articulate language, quoted this Oregon statute at March 26th's open house regarding OPUC's consideration for need:
ORS 758.015 Certificate of public convenience and necessity.
(1) When any person, as defined in ORS 758.400, providing electric utility service, as defined in ORS 758.400, or any transmission company, proposes to construct an overhead transmission line which will necessitate a condemnation of land or an interest therein, it shall petition the Public Utility Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity setting forth a detailed description and the purpose of the proposed transmission line, the estimated cost, the route to be followed, the availability of alternate routes, a description of other transmission lines connecting the same areas, and such other information in such form as the commission may reasonably require in determining the public convenience and necessity.
Other quotes from Cliff Looney's comments to the PUC:
Idaho Power’s presentation to the public has been cast in terms that are not entirely accurate. I quote from a recent Idaho Power advertisement in our local paper which is phrased to appear to refer to the new planned line and refers to it as
“a line that runs near where you live not only delivers power you count on every day, it runs the life saving equipment at a nearby hospital and provides light for the elementary school in a neighboring community.”
It is clear that the proposed 500 megawatt line is not necessary to provide electricity to our hospital or our schools.
This is a line that is planned not to put power in our homes and institutions but rather to put money in Idaho Power’s pocket.
What we are really talking about in this matter is whether Idaho Power needs to create a profit center for its company while it deprives the people of this valley of many of the beneficial aspects of a situation that exists without the presence of this huge line.
Need is relative. It is important to our reality and to this process to consider all of the NEEDS of the public and private persons involved. ORS 758.015 emphasizes “public convenience and necessity.”
I brought with me a couple of articles and I have made copies which I attach to my written testimony:
BY ROCKY BARKER - Published: 01/11/09
http://www.idahostatesman.com/235/story/629155.html
by MARK AREND http://www.siteselection.com/features/2009/jan/Idaho/
All of that simply means a lessening of need for electrical supply from any utility.
Up and down the corridor along the freeway, US 84, we see new wind energy fields springing up and we understand that additional wind energy program is planned for the area around Durkee and that geothermal resources are to be developed in Malheur County. All of this means that there will be increased distributed generation. What the volume of distributed generation will mean eventually is that smaller transmission lines can be used to serve local users.
A second recent article appears in the Oregon State University Extension Service news letter that comes from the Eastern Oregon Forestry office. This excellent article by John Farrell of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance is on rural power as the key to sustainability.
http://www.newrules.org/de/ruralpower.pdf
This article points out that there are many advantages to not relying on the huge centralized production of power. Independence and development of green power from geothermal, solar, wind farms and bio-mass energy is becoming economically attractive. . .
Idaho Power’s applications do not approach a realistic appraisal and consideration of these changes. In fact, they have relied upon old data and have now sought to attach their addendum to an old application when it is really the new data and assessment of where we are going in our approach to solving energy supply problems that needs to be made. That poses a very strong reason for not allowing the addendum to be considered with the 2006 application and to require Idaho Power to do a better job of assessing the possibilities of local generation of power and what it will mean over the next 10 to 15 years. . .
Lastly, I wish to get back to the topic of need. The real need is to be realistic. The infrastructure that is developed should be a long term asset that should not impose avoidable injury and inconvenience. It should not simply be a profit center for a company that wishes to ride rough-shod over the many needs of the citizens who are so profoundly impacted by the creation of these colossal facilities. The long term value of the farms and economy is just as valuable as this line, perhaps much more. Much of that will be lost if this line is inappropriately located.
The route selected is inextricably connected to Need.
ORS 758.015 recognizes that connection by requiring any applying utility to provide a “detailed description” and “purpose” of the line, “the route to be followed, the availability of alternate routes, a description of other transmission lines connecting the same areas,” and other information to determining “public convenience and necessity.”
These are clear mandates for your decision to consider the probable injury to other “needs” that the public may have which legitimately compete with the utilities interests in route placement.
What we NEED is for Idaho Power to rationally select a route that does not destroy private property interests and private sensibilities to the aesthetics of its people or present health risks or other economic obstacles to the lives of thousands of people who have relied on the world in which they live continuing as they have known it and not being negatively impacted by this kind of facility.
When they do so then the energy and economic needs that they emphasize can be rationally examined.
The need here cannot be examined in a vacuum. It must be weighed with other needs and balanced so that the greater good for all of our community and all of our needs are considered.
I have listened to the Idaho Power Company spokesmen.
There has been no mention of a need to locate this line across Exclusively Farm Use lands.
Not a single iota of the need Idaho Power Company speaks to will go unmet if their line avoids Exclusively Farm Use lands.
ORS 758.015(1) requires a determination based on “public convenience and necessity”
No certificate of necessity should be issued until a route is selected avoiding Exclusively Farm Use lands to avoid injury to our citizens.
Public assets should be on public land.
ORS 758.015 Certificate of public convenience and necessity.
(1) When any person, as defined in ORS 758.400, providing electric utility service, as defined in ORS 758.400, or any transmission company, proposes to construct an overhead transmission line which will necessitate a condemnation of land or an interest therein, it shall petition the Public Utility Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity setting forth a detailed description and the purpose of the proposed transmission line, the estimated cost, the route to be followed, the availability of alternate routes, a description of other transmission lines connecting the same areas, and such other information in such form as the commission may reasonably require in determining the public convenience and necessity.
Other quotes from Cliff Looney's comments to the PUC:
Idaho Power’s presentation to the public has been cast in terms that are not entirely accurate. I quote from a recent Idaho Power advertisement in our local paper which is phrased to appear to refer to the new planned line and refers to it as
“a line that runs near where you live not only delivers power you count on every day, it runs the life saving equipment at a nearby hospital and provides light for the elementary school in a neighboring community.”
It is clear that the proposed 500 megawatt line is not necessary to provide electricity to our hospital or our schools.
This is a line that is planned not to put power in our homes and institutions but rather to put money in Idaho Power’s pocket.
What we are really talking about in this matter is whether Idaho Power needs to create a profit center for its company while it deprives the people of this valley of many of the beneficial aspects of a situation that exists without the presence of this huge line.
Need is relative. It is important to our reality and to this process to consider all of the NEEDS of the public and private persons involved. ORS 758.015 emphasizes “public convenience and necessity.”
I brought with me a couple of articles and I have made copies which I attach to my written testimony:
Boise startup lights way to 'smart grid'
Inovus' SmartPole sets the company up to be a local leader in a national energy revolution
Inovus' SmartPole sets the company up to be a local leader in a national energy revolution
http://www.idahostatesman.com/235/story/629155.html
Pocatello Area Carves a Renewable Energy Niche
Micron ponders jobs for idle factories
The company tells legislators a fab in Boise and the former MPC plant could be used to make alternative energy products.
The company tells legislators a fab in Boise and the former MPC plant could be used to make alternative energy products.
By Brad Talbutt Published: 01/09/09 http://www.idahostatesman.com/235/story/627000.html
All of that simply means a lessening of need for electrical supply from any utility.
Up and down the corridor along the freeway, US 84, we see new wind energy fields springing up and we understand that additional wind energy program is planned for the area around Durkee and that geothermal resources are to be developed in Malheur County. All of this means that there will be increased distributed generation. What the volume of distributed generation will mean eventually is that smaller transmission lines can be used to serve local users.
A second recent article appears in the Oregon State University Extension Service news letter that comes from the Eastern Oregon Forestry office. This excellent article by John Farrell of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance is on rural power as the key to sustainability.
http://www.newrules.org/de/ruralpower.pdf
This article points out that there are many advantages to not relying on the huge centralized production of power. Independence and development of green power from geothermal, solar, wind farms and bio-mass energy is becoming economically attractive. . .
Idaho Power’s applications do not approach a realistic appraisal and consideration of these changes. In fact, they have relied upon old data and have now sought to attach their addendum to an old application when it is really the new data and assessment of where we are going in our approach to solving energy supply problems that needs to be made. That poses a very strong reason for not allowing the addendum to be considered with the 2006 application and to require Idaho Power to do a better job of assessing the possibilities of local generation of power and what it will mean over the next 10 to 15 years. . .
Lastly, I wish to get back to the topic of need. The real need is to be realistic. The infrastructure that is developed should be a long term asset that should not impose avoidable injury and inconvenience. It should not simply be a profit center for a company that wishes to ride rough-shod over the many needs of the citizens who are so profoundly impacted by the creation of these colossal facilities. The long term value of the farms and economy is just as valuable as this line, perhaps much more. Much of that will be lost if this line is inappropriately located.
The route selected is inextricably connected to Need.
ORS 758.015 recognizes that connection by requiring any applying utility to provide a “detailed description” and “purpose” of the line, “the route to be followed, the availability of alternate routes, a description of other transmission lines connecting the same areas,” and other information to determining “public convenience and necessity.”
These are clear mandates for your decision to consider the probable injury to other “needs” that the public may have which legitimately compete with the utilities interests in route placement.
What we NEED is for Idaho Power to rationally select a route that does not destroy private property interests and private sensibilities to the aesthetics of its people or present health risks or other economic obstacles to the lives of thousands of people who have relied on the world in which they live continuing as they have known it and not being negatively impacted by this kind of facility.
When they do so then the energy and economic needs that they emphasize can be rationally examined.
The need here cannot be examined in a vacuum. It must be weighed with other needs and balanced so that the greater good for all of our community and all of our needs are considered.
I have listened to the Idaho Power Company spokesmen.
There has been no mention of a need to locate this line across Exclusively Farm Use lands.
Not a single iota of the need Idaho Power Company speaks to will go unmet if their line avoids Exclusively Farm Use lands.
ORS 758.015(1) requires a determination based on “public convenience and necessity”
No certificate of necessity should be issued until a route is selected avoiding Exclusively Farm Use lands to avoid injury to our citizens.
Public assets should be on public land.
