6.6. ERMUSR 01-11-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

COX 2020 INTERIM REPORT DECEMBER 2004 PLANMNC The biennial state transmission planning process established by statute in 2001 and governed by the PUC provides increased and early public participation and is intended to promote overall a more expeditious and less contentious need certification process. Certification as part of the biennial process was intended as an expedited alternative to the certificate-of--need process; however, this approach has not been used and may pose more risk and difficulty than advantages. The certificate-of--need process has been used for alarge-scale project only once, in 2003. The new alternative biennial certification process authorized by the 2001 Legislature has not been tested for smaller-scale projects. Nonetheless, given the anticipated significant need for new transmission in the relatively near future, the question is whether current state processes for permitting transmission facilities are properly designed to accommodate needed infrastructure improvements. TIMING The Minnesota certificate-of--need process for transmission requires the PUC to approve or deny a proposal within six months of application (Minn. Stat, 216B.243, subd. 5); the route process requires the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) to decide within 12 months for full process (Minn. Stat. 116C.57, subd. 1) and six months for alternative process (Minn. Stat. 116C.575, subd. 7). Although both regulatory processes identify a time period in which they are to be completed, as a practical matter the statutory deadlines frequently are inadequate to ensure the processes move along to an expeditious conclusion. There are no consequences if the deadlines are missed, and it is impractical for utilities to challenge missed deadlines. Further, some deadlines may be unrealistic (too long or too short), depending on the nature of the project. REGIONAL ISSUES Transmission affects interstate commerce, which is why it is regulated in part by the FERC. Unlike the interstate natural gas pipeline system, however, transmission need and routing decisions are made entirely at the state level. State regulators often are presented with the difficult task of balancing both regional and state needs, while being required to follow only state law. This promotes the state's interest over regional interests. No single forum is charged with looking out for the regional interest. JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES As noted above, two state agencies are involved in Minnesota's permitting processes: ^ The PUC has jurisdiction over certificates of need for any high-voltage transmission line of 100 kilovolts or more and greater than 10 miles or that crosses a state line, and any high-voltage transmission line greater than 200 kilovolts. ^ The EQB has jurisdiction over granting route permits to any high-voltage transmission line greater than 100 kilovolts. 21