STATE OF VERMONT
PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD
Docket No. 7373
Petition of Vermont Transco LLC, and Vermont
Electric Power Company, Inc. (collectively,
“VELCO”), and Central Vermont Public Service
Corporation (“CVPS”) for a Certificate of
Public Good, pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248, for
the “Southern Loop Project,” located in
Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro, Dummerston,
Newfane, Brookline, Townshend, Grafton,
Windham, Andover, Chester, Ludlow and
Cavendish, Vermont, consisting of the following
elements: (1) a new, approximately 51-mile, 345
kV transmission line between VernonCavendish, to be built parallel to and within the
same utility right-of-way as VELCO’s existing
Vernon-Cavendish 345 kV line; (2) a new
VELCO 345/115 kV Vernon substation, to be
located just north of the Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station; (3) a new 345/115/46
kV Newfane substation; (4) a new,
approximately one-mile, 345 kV transmission
line loop between the new Newfane substation
and the new Vernon-Cavendish 345 kV line; (5)
expansion of VELCO’s Coolidge substation in
Cavendish, Vermont; and (6) the implementing
of incremental energy efficiency to defer
transmission upgrades in Southern Vermont
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Technical Hearings
held at Montpelier,
Vermont on October 29
and November 6, 2008
Order entered:
JOINT PROPOSAL FOR DECISION
SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF
PETITIONERS, THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE,
AND THE AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES
SUBMITTED ON DECEMBER 3, 2008
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 2 of 162
PRESENT:
James Volz, Chairman
David C. Coen, Board Member
John D. Burke, Board Member
Kurt Janson, Esq.
Lars Bang-Jensen
Edward McNamara, Esq.
David Watts
Mary Jo Krolewski
APPEARANCES:
Kimberly K. Hayden, Esq.
Megan R. Ludwig, Esq.
Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC
For Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. and Vermont
Transco LLC
Morris L. Silver, Esq.
For Central Vermont Public Service Corporation
James H. Porter, III, Esq.
Laura Scanlan Beliveau, Esq.
For the Vermont Department of Public Service
Michael Steeves, Esq.
For the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
Bernard D. Lambek, Esq.
Zalinger, Cameron and Lambek, PC
For ISO-New England, Inc.
James P. Matteau, Executive Director
For the Windham Regional Commission
-2-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 3 of 162
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................5
II. Procedural History....................................................................................................................11
III. FINDINGS ..............................................................................................................................12
A. Project Components ...........................................................................................................12
B. Project Cost and Regional Cost Recovery .........................................................................22
C. Project Schedule.................................................................................................................24
D. Public Outreach ..................................................................................................................24
E. Section 248(b) Findings .....................................................................................................27
Orderly Development of the Region [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(1)] ...........................................27
Need for Present and Future Demand for Services [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(2)] .....................45
System Stability and Reliability [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(3)]..................................................80
Economic Benefit to the State [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(4)].....................................................82
Aesthetics, Historic Sites and Water Purity, the Natural Environment and Public
Health and Safety [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(5)] ..................................................................86
Outstanding Resource Waters ......................................................................................87
Air Pollution.................................................................................................................87
Water Pollution ............................................................................................................89
Headwaters ...................................................................................................................89
Waste Disposal.............................................................................................................90
Water Conservation .....................................................................................................91
Floodways ....................................................................................................................91
Streams and Shorelines ................................................................................................92
-3-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 4 of 162
Wetlands ......................................................................................................................93
Water Supply ...............................................................................................................96
Soil Erosion..................................................................................................................96
Transportation Systems ................................................................................................97
Educational Services ....................................................................................................98
Municipal Services.......................................................................................................98
Aesthetics .....................................................................................................................98
Rare and Irreplaceable Natural Areas ........................................................................121
Necessary Wildlife Habitat & Endangered Species ...................................................125
Historic Sites ..............................................................................................................127
Development Affecting Public Investments ..............................................................138
Transmission Vegetation Management......................................................................139
Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) ...................................................................................145
Least-Cost Integrated Resource Plan [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(6)] ..............................................151
Compliance with Electric Energy Plan [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(7)] ..........................................153
Outstanding Resource Waters [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(8)] .........................................................156
Existing Transmission Facilities [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(10)] ..................................................156
IV. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................157
ORDER ........................................................................................................................................158
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC GOOD ISSUED ...........................................................................160
-4-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 5 of 162
I.
Introduction
In this proceeding, Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. and Vermont Transco LLC
(“VELCO”), and Central Vermont Public Service Corporation (“CVPS”, and together with
VELCO, the “Petitioners”) petitioned, pursuant to Section 248 of Title 30 and Public Service
Board (“Board”) Rule 5.400, for a Certificate of Public Good (“CPG”), to construct the Southern
Loop Transmission Upgrade Project (the “Southern Loop Project” or “Project”). The Project
involves the addition of a second 345 kV transmission line between Vernon, Vermont and
VELCO’s 345 kV Coolidge substation in Cavendish, Vermont, together with a new 345 kV
substation at Vernon and additional 345 kV equipment at the Coolidge substation. In addition, to
address existing local reliability problems on the CVPS system, the Project includes a new
Newfane 345/115/46 kV substation and an approximately one-mile 345 kV loop into the new
Newfane substation from the new 345 kV Vernon-to-Cavendish line.
A.
1.
Description of Southern Loop Electric Reliability Problems
The Regional Reliability Problems1
The regional need for this Project was identified in the Critical Load Study prepared by
VELCO for the Northwest Vermont Reliability Project (“NRP”), in which VELCO reported that
an outage of the Plattsburgh-Vermont 115 kV transmission tie (“PV-20”), with loss of the
Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line, would result in voltage collapse at a 1165 MW load level (with
NRP upgrades in service). It was also identified in the VELCO 2006 Long Range Transmission
Plan Analysis as the most significant problem on the system. As a result, VELCO and the other
signatories to the Docket No. 7081 Memorandum of Understanding (“Docket 7081 MOU”)
identified the Southern Loop Project as part of the transition plan set forth in the Docket 7081
MOU. Current analysis reveals that this Project is needed at a significantly lower, and in fact
already surpassed, load threshold.2
1 See infra findings 268-317.
2 See infra findings 291-293. The current studies and system conditions reveal serious system deficiencies at 945
MW or lower.
-5-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 6 of 162
The loss of the existing Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line and the loss of the Vermont
Yankee 345/115 kV transformer located at the southern end of the Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV
line are among the two biggest regional reliability concerns affecting Vermont. The existing
Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line serves critical east - west and north - south energy transfers
within New England and into and out of New York. If this line is lost at current summer peak
demand levels, numerous 115 kV lines can be overloaded in multiple states, potentially resulting
in voltage collapse and blackouts impacting an area extending from north of the Capital District
Area in New York (Albany, Schenectady and Troy) through Glens Falls, Saratoga and Whitehall,
into central and northern Vermont, and to areas in and around central and northern New
Hampshire. Under this scenario, greater than 85% of Vermont’s electric customers could be
impacted. Approximately 1000 MW of Vermont load, 580 MW of New York load, and 250
MW of New Hampshire load are at risk of voltage collapse or blackout in the event of an outage
involving this 345 kV line under current day peak load conditions.
The second regional reliability problem arises if the Vermont Yankee 345/115 kV
transformer located at the Vermont Yankee substation in Vernon (at the southern end of the
Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line) is lost. This transformer connects the New England 345 kV
network to the local 115 kV system, which in turn supplies load in southeastern Vermont
(Brattleboro and surrounding areas) and southwestern New Hampshire. Loss of this transformer
places all local loads in southeastern Vermont and southwestern New Hampshire on the 115 kV
network supplied solely out of the Public Service Company of New Hampshire (“PSNH”)
network in New Hampshire, and CVPS’ 46 kV network supplied remotely from Bennington.
Loss of this 35+ year old transformer may result in a shutdown of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Plant. There are few, if any, local options for alternate supply when the electric demand
is at or near peak summer demand levels. Outages on these remaining local transmission (115
kV) and local sub-transmission (46 kV) facilities lead to loss of local load until the lost facilities
are restored. In these scenarios, 30 to 50 MW of CVPS load in southeastern Vermont and 150 to
200 MW of load in southwestern New Hampshire could be lost.
-6-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 7 of 162
2.
Local Reliability Problems on the CVPS System in Southern Vermont 3
In addition to the regional reliability problems just described, electrical facilities in
southern Vermont owned by CVPS have limited ability to support increased electrical demand
and are unable to withstand failures of, or to have preventive maintenance conducted on, key
components at present demand levels. CVPS’s customer load in southern Vermont is served by a
66-mile, 46 kV sub-transmission line that runs from CVPS’s Vernon Road substation in
Brattleboro, Vermont, to the company’s Woodford Road substation located in Bennington,
Vermont. The CVPS system reliability problem stretches from southwestern to southeastern
Vermont, covering the areas from Brattleboro-Stratton and Stratton-Bennington, and potentially
impacts 40,000 customers. During sixty percent (60%) of the hours in the year the loss of certain
individual line segments or other equipment could result in a power outage to some or all of the
customers in this load area of southern Vermont.
Since 1983, the local reliability problems created by load growth have been mitigated by
CVPS through energy conservation, load control, interruptible/supplemental service ski area
controls, and small system upgrades (e.g., capacitor additions at existing substations). Although
CVPS has been successful over the past several decades in slowing load growth to defer
transmission upgrades, the system has experienced a growing load factor, has now exceeded its
capacity, and can no longer provide adequate and reliable service to customers in southern
Vermont.
3.
The Project Addresses the Reliability Deficiencies and is the Optimal
Solution 4
VELCO, CVPS and a group of public stakeholder representatives collaborated in an
intensive study effort to assess and identify potential solutions to solve the serious reliability
problems affecting the southern Vermont and regional systems. In addition, both companies
undertook extensive analysis of potential transmission and non-transmission alternative (“NTA”)
solutions to the local and regional system problems. The principal components of the Southern
3 See infra findings 318-329.
4 See infra findings 330-345.
-7-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 8 of 162
Loop Project transmission upgrades, together with a synchronous condenser at the Kendall Farm
substation being constructed by CVPS in Winhall, Vermont, and incremental geo-targeted
energy efficiency and customer-sited distributed generation, were endorsed as the optimal
reliability solutions to the local and regional problems identified. Petitioners decided to defer a
previously identified Project component – an approximately 49-mile, 115 kV transmission line
upgrade between Dummerston and Bennington via Stratton. CVPS plans to defer this Project
component by implementing incremental DSM and encouraging the development of generation
on customer sites.
The Southern Loop Project will fix the system deficiencies described above and will
bring VELCO into compliance with the new federal Reliability Standards, as well as similar
regional Reliability Standards that apply to the system. The transmission components of the
Southern Loop Project include a new “Coolidge Connector”, consisting of a second 345 kV
transmission line from Vernon to Cavendish, Vermont, adjacent to VELCO’s existing 345 kV
Vernon-to-Cavendish transmission line, together with substation upgrades at VELCO’s Coolidge
substation located in Cavendish, and a new Vernon substation to be located just north of the
existing Vermont Yankee 345 kV substation yard in Vernon. With the completion of a second
Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line, loss of one 345 kV line in the corridor still leaves the other to
perform the necessary network function for this transmission system function. Second, the
Project will result in a new substation in Vernon, just north of the Vermont Yankee substation,
which will address breaker failure contingencies by removing key elements of the local power
system from adjacent breaker positions within the new Vernon substation. Finally, a second
345/115 kV autotransformer will be installed in this new substation, removing the local load
reliability susceptibility for loss of the sole Vermont Yankee 345/115 kV autotransformer.
The Project addresses the local CVPS reliability problem in southern Vermont by
including a new injection point (new Newfane 345/115/46 kV substation and one-mile 345 kV
loop line between the Newfane substation and the Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line). This
Project element complements the ongoing CVPS development of the Kendall Farm Substation,
the delivery of geo-targeted energy efficiency to the Southern Loop target area by Efficiency
-8-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 9 of 162
Vermont5, and the CVPS efforts to promote the implementation of customer-cited generation in
areas served by the 46 kV sub-transmission system.
We also find that the Project is the most cost-effective solution. However, given that
current analysis reveals that the load threshold for the needed upgrades was exceeded years ago,
we conclude that there are no alternative solutions that would have been sufficient, under any
cost scenario, to avoid or defer the need for this Project.
As compared to the alternatives studied, including alternatives with more aggressive
energy efficiency and new generation, the Coolidge Connector component of the Southern Loop
Project has the lowest capital costs to Vermont, and also yields the lowest average retail rates.
While the societal costs of an energy efficiency scenario may be lower over the life of the
Project, our determination of cost-effectiveness is not limited to one parameter. As we clarified
in our order in Investigation Into Least-Cost Integrated Resource Planning for Vermont Electric
Power Company Inc.’s Transmission System, Docket No. 7081, Order of 6/20/07, the relative
rate and bill impacts of the alternatives, the financial feasibility of each alternative, the ability of
each alternative to be implemented in a timely manner to address the reliability deficiency, and
relative economic benefits to the state, are all economic considerations that we must evaluate.6
On balance, the Project is the most cost-effective solution, having considered these factors.
We are also mindful of Optimal Energy’s caution that an important source of uncertainty
as to the energy efficiency scenario studied, is the fact that “no utility has ever sustained such
large distributed resource commitments for so long in so many markets simultaneously and
actually achieved the relative magnitudes of peak demand savings projected over the next decade
… .” 7 Moreover, in order to meet minimum reliability criteria, an efficiency solution would
need to be supplemented with additional generation. VELCO studies further indicate that the
impact of load growth outside of Vermont on the Vermont “need” level for this Project is non-
5 Order re Geographic Targeting of Energy Efficiency Utility Funds in 2009 - 2011, Order of 11/4/2008 at 10.
6 Investigation Into Least-Cost Integrated Resource Planning for Vermont Electric Power Company Inc.’s
Transmission System, Docket No. 7081, Order of 6/20/07 at 21-22
7 Kleinman pf. at 8.
-9-
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 10 of 162
linear. As New England peak load increases, Vermont peak load must actually decrease, to
maintain system reliability without the additional 345 kV line.8
As noted, the Project does incorporate plans for energy efficiency and customer-cited
distributed generation in order to defer a potential 115 kV Project component. However, the
remainder of the Project cannot be deferred by non-transmission alternatives, and is the most
cost-effective solution among potentially available transmission alternatives to solve the severe
reliability exposures faced by both the regional and local system networks.
We note that on the regional level, this Project need is driven by load and the topology of
the interconnected bulk power systems of Vermont, New York, and New England. Most of the
transmission lines in New England are fairly short and networked as a grid, resulting in close
inter-relationships of electrical performance in all corners of the system.9 A regional system
solution, as proposed by Petitioners and supported by ISO-NE, and one whose costs are shared
by the region, is an appropriate and cost-effective solution to the regional bulk power system
problems presented in this case.
In addition to improving the reliability of the Vermont transmission system, the stronger,
more stable transmission system resulting from the Project will provide a more robust framework
with regard to generation in Vermont, as well as providing this area access to generation from
elsewhere in Vermont and New England. This will reduce congestion that results from
operational reliability constraints and improve efficiency by reducing system losses. The added
transmission strength afforded by the Project will result in added stability and power quality
benefits, particularly through redundancy of the added 345 kV line from Vernon to Coolidge.10
The proposed Project, as conditioned by this Order, will ensure electric reliability for the
area and will not result in any undue adverse impacts under any of the substantive criteria of 30
V.S.A. § 248(b). Consequently, we find that the Project is in the general good of the state and
its residents and approve the Project, as conditioned below.
8 LaForest pf. at 13.
9 Kowalski pf. at 7.
10 Smith pf. at 19-20.
- 10 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 11 of 162
II. Procedural History
A.
Appearances and Parties
A prehearing conference was held on December 19, 2007. Appearances were entered by
Kimberly K. Hayden, Esq., of Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC for VELCO and Vermont Transco
LLC; Morris L. Silver, Esq., for CVPS; James H. Porter, III, Esq. and Laura Scanlan Beliveau,
Esq. for the Department of Public Service; David C. Englander, Esq. for the Agency of Natural
Resources; Sandra E. Levine, Esq. for the Conservation Law Foundation; James Matteau for the
Windham Regional Commission; David Ryan for the Dummerston Planning Commission;
George T. McNaughton, Esq., for Carl Ferenbach, III and Judy W. Ferenbach; and Dennis L.
Shaffer for the Vermont Land Trust.
The Board granted the following parties’ requests to intervene in the Docket: Carl
Ferenbach, III and Judy W. Ferenbach (the “Ferenbachs”)11; the Conservation Law Foundation
(“CLF”); the Windham Regional Commission (“WRC”); the Town of Brookline; the Town of
Dummerston; the Town of Newfane; the Town of Townshend; the Town of Brattleboro; the
Town of Cavendish; the Vermont Public Power Supply Authority (“VPPSA”); ISO New
England, Inc. (“ISO-NE”); and the Vermont Land Trust (“VLT”).12
In its February 8, 2008 Order on Motions to Intervene, the Board granted ISO-NE’s
request to admit pro hac vice Anthony M. McLeod, Esq. Id. The Board later granted ANR’s
motion for the admission pro hac vice of Michael Steeves, Esq. on May 16, 2008. Order of
5/16/08 at 2.
The following parties either withdrew from or suspended their participation in the Docket
prior to the technical hearings: the Ferenbachs, VLT, the Vermont Division for Historic
Preservation, the Town of Brookline, and the Town of Brattleboro.
The Board denied the motion of Northeast Utilities Service Company (“NUSCO”) to
intervene by its Order of March 19, 2008, on the grounds that NUSCO had not met the criteria
for intervention: NUSCO’s interest in the proceeding was adequately represented by ISO-NE;
11 See Order of 1/10/08.
12 See Order of 2/8/08.
- 11 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 12 of 162
NUSCO failed to demonstrate that there were not alternative means for protecting its interests;
and NUSCO had not explained with any clarity how its interests in Vermont may be affected by
the proposed Project. Order of 3/19/08 at 2.
B.
Site Visit and Hearings
A public hearing and site visit were conducted on January 17, 2008 and May 22, 2008,
respectively.
Technical hearings were held on October 29, 2008 and November 6, 2008. Prefiled
testimony and exhibits filed by the following parties were admitted into the record: the
Petitioners; DPS; ISO-NE; ANR; and the Town of Dummerston.
Petitioners entered into a number of settlements and stipulations with parties to this
proceeding, including ANR, DPS, the Town of Dummerston (with respect to the prefiled
testimony of Kurt Yeager), the Ferenbachs, and VLT. These stipulations were each admitted
into the record as Exhibits. See Exhs. Stipulation 1 – 5, 5A.
III. FINDINGS
Based on the evidence of record and the testimony presented at hearing, the Petitioners
offer the following findings.
A.
Project Components
1.
The Project includes the following principal components:

New 51-Mile, Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV Transmission Line
The proposed Project involves the construction of a second Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV
line (the “360 line”) to be located within VELCO’s existing transmission right of way
(“ROW”) that extends from VELCO’s Coolidge substation located in Cavendish,
Vermont, south to a proposed new 345 kV substation (the “Vernon substation”) to be
located north of the existing Vermont Yankee substation in Vernon, Vermont. The new
345 kV line will pass through thirteen (13) towns: Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro,
Dummerston, Newfane, Brookline, Townshend, Grafton, Windham, Andover, Chester,
Ludlow and Cavendish, Vermont. The new 345 kV line will be located west of and
parallel to VELCO’s existing 345 kV Vernon-to-Cavendish line (the “340”) line. The
- 12 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 13 of 162
configuration of the 360 line will match the 340 line to the extent possible. Most of the
360 line, with the exception of the first approximately one-mile segment out of the
Vernon substation, will utilize wood H-Frame structures similar to the existing line.
Single pole steel structures will be utilized along the first approximately one-mile
segment, matching the existing single steel poles in that location.

New 345/115 kV Vernon Substation
The Project includes the construction of a new VELCO 345/115 kV substation just north
of Entergy’s Vermont Yankee Nuclear plant. The proposed 9-acre substation site will
serve as the major switching facility for the area, interconnecting the existing Vermont
Yankee transmission system and the Vermont transmission system including the existing
340 Line and the new 360 line. The proposed design meets current design standards for
bulk power system substations. This design allows for, among other things, planned and
unplanned maintenance.

New 345/115/45 kV Newfane Substation
The Petitioners plan to construct a new 345/115/46 kV substation in the Town of
Newfane to provide a source from one of the nearby 345 kV lines (the 360 line) to the
local CVPS 46 kV system. This proposed 8-acre substation site will provide a strong
source to reinforce the local 46 kV system, and is one of the key project elements that
will improve the system’s ability to respond to the existing local reliability issues in
southern Vermont. A proposed approximately one-mile 345 kV loop into and out of the
three-breaker ring bus Newfane substation from the new 360 line (for a total of roughly
two miles of 345 kV line) will provide the necessary flexibility required in the 345 kV
system by allowing portions of it to be isolated for planned operational and maintenance
purposes, providing the minimum operational flexibility needed for both VELCO and
CVPS.
- 13 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 14 of 162

New Newfane Loop
In order to access the new Newfane substation, VELCO will need to extend two new 345
kV lines (to form a “loop”) for approximately one-mile from Dummerston into the new
Newfane substation, expanding upon the existing CVPS 150-foot 46 kV subtransmission
line corridor. This new loop will provide local reliability support to the CVPS 46 kV
subtransmission loop by energizing the Newfane substation.

Expansion of the Coolidge Substation
VELCO’s existing 6-acre Coolidge substation site, located at Quent Phelan Road in
Cavendish, will need to be expanded to connect the new 345 kV transmission line from
Vernon. The existing 345 kV switchyard will be expanded into a three-bay breaker-andone-half switching station, with associated breakers, switches and other equipment.
Expansion of the existing substation yard (including fence expansion) is necessary to
accommodate new equipment included in this scope, modify the substation’s design
according to current bulk power system design standards, as well as provision for a future
T2 transformer as shown on the conceptual general arrangements. In addition, 115 kV
station equipment is being replaced now to allow full use of the existing 345/115 kV
Coolidge autotransformer’s rating and remove undersized and outdated station equipment
concurrent with this station upgrade.
LaForest pf. at 17-21.
2.
In addition, CVPS is currently developing a synchronous condenser facility at a
new substation being constructed in Winhall, Vermont (the “Kendall Farm substation”), that was
approved by the Board by its Order dated March 28, 2008 in Docket No. 7246. The CVPS
Southern Loop target area has also been the recipient of geo-targeted energy efficiency services
by Efficiency Vermont and the company plans on continuing the acquisition of efficiency
resources in this area, as well as the introduction of customer-sited distributed generation as a
part of its plan for the provision of service to customers served by the CVPS Southern Loop 46
kV subtransmission system. Jones/Kirby pf. at 4, 24-26; Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-6 at 21.
- 14 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 15 of 162
1.
3.
New 51-Mile, Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV Transmission Line (“360
line”)
The route for the new 360 line will run a total of approximately 51 miles from the
proposed Vernon substation to the existing Coolidge substation in Cavendish, in the same
corridor and parallel to the existing Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line. McNamara pf. at 5.
4.
In order to minimize aesthetic impact and provide a more uniform appearance, the
new line will closely match the adjacent existing 345 kV line in location and configuration. Id.
5.
Like the existing line, the new 360 line will also be a single circuit wood H-frame
transmission line, except for the first approximately one-mile line segment, which will be single
pole steel structures. Id. at 3, 4.
6.
Temporary wood structures may be required to be installed in the area of the
proposed substation, to facilitate construction. Id. at 6.
7.
The centerline of the new alignment will be offset to the west from the centerline
of the existing 345 kV line by 100’, leaving 75’ from the new centerline to the existing western
edge of the overall 250-foot wide ROW. Id. at 5-6.
8.
All of the H-frame wood tangent structures are direct-embedded wood poles with
Corten steel crossarms. Id. at 6.
9.
In Vernon, about one mile (nine structures) of the new line north of the proposed
substation will be constructed of new Corten steel single poles configured to match the existing
steel poles; the existing steel poles will be repainted to match the new poles’ Corten color. Id.;
Exhibit Petitioners WM-6 (describes heights for these structures); see also Exhibit Petitioners
Supp. RR-3.
10.
The centerline of these new poles will be offset 50’ west from the centerline of
the existing 345 kV steel pole line, leaving 50’ from the new centerline to the existing western
edge of the overall 200 foot wide ROW in this section. McNamara pf. at 6.
11.
These will feature three 15’ to 18’ davit arms extending from one side of the
structure, carrying the bundled conductors in a vertical configuration, and one 18’ davit arm
- 15 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 16 of 162
carrying the shield wire (one 0.62” diameter Optical Fiber Ground Wire) matching the existing
steel pole configuration. The empty davit arms on the west side of the existing steel poles will
be removed. Id.
12.
The new steel poles with steel davit arms will be installed on concrete foundations
similar to the current steel pole structures. Id. at 6-7.
13.
The two poles of the tangent H-frame suspension structures will be spaced at 26
feet. Id. at 5.
14.
Angles in the alignment (angle structures) will be made with wood three-pole
structures, with the poles spaced from 29 to 37 feet apart. Id.
15.
Three-pole, dead-end structures will also be used for statically attaching the
conductors to the poles (rather than suspending them from clamps, as is done with all tangent
and some angle structures). Id.
16.
The dead-end structures provide protection against cascading failure of the line
under heavy load conditions (e.g., heavy ice with wind). Id.
17.
All of these wood three-pole dead-end structures are guyed (as are the wood
three-pole angle structures, which may or may not also serve as dead-end structures). Id.
18.
Following the filing of its prefiled direct testimony on November 8, 2007,
VELCO determined that many dead-end structures had initially been proposed on the new 360
line in unnecessary locations with respect to prevention of cascading line failures. As a result,
VELCO submitted a revised design which included 40 fewer three-pole dead-end structures than
were initially proposed. See Roam supp. pf. at 4; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-1.
19.
Reducing the number of dead-end structures results in fewer poles, guy wires,
anchors, pole hardware and conductor splicing throughout the Southern Loop Project. Exhibit
Petitioners Supp. RR-1.
20.
Typical steel pole and wood H-frame cross sections for this line are included as
Exhibit Petitioners WM-4.
21.
Over 75% of the new structures were able to be kept within 10’ of the above-
ground length of the existing structures. On average, the above-ground length of the new
- 16 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 17 of 162
structures only increased by about 3’; from approximately 77’ for the existing structures to about
80’ for the new structures. McNamara pf. at 9; see also Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-3 at 9.
2.
22.
New 345/115 kV Vernon Substation
VELCO proposes to build the new Vernon substation in a vacant fenced-in lot
located on Entergy’s property, just to the north of the existing Vermont Yankee substation yard.
Barrett pf. at 3; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-10; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-14.
23.
The proposed new Vernon substation will consist of a new 345 kV substation, two
345/115 kV power transformers, and a new 115 kV substation. Barrett pf. at 4; Exhibit
Petitioners Supp. RR-10, Supp. RR-11, Supp. RR-13, Supp. RR-14 (detailed general
arrangement, elevation drawings, one-line drawings, and preliminary site plan).
24.
The 345 kV substation will be designed as a four-bay, breaker and one half
configuration bus, with four line positions, two transformer positions, one generator position, and
one future position. Id.
25.
The 345 kV substation will initially contain eleven circuit breakers with
associated structural steel, disconnect switches, bus work and auxiliary equipment.
26.
Space has been allocated for a future twelfth circuit breaker and third 345/115 kV
power transformer. In addition, space in the yard has been reserved for two additional 345 kV
bays. Id.
27.
The 115 kV substation will be designed as a two-bay, breaker and one half
configuration bus, with two line positions and two transformer positions. Space in the yard has
been reserved for two additional 115 kV bays. Id.
28.
The 115 kV substation will initially contain six circuit breakers with associated
structural steel, disconnect switches, bus work and auxiliary equipment. Id.
29.
The existing capacitor banks will be relocated from the Vermont Yankee 115 kV
switchyard to connect to the buses in the new Vernon substation. Id.
30.
The substation perimeter fence size and substation footprint will be approximately
9 acres, reduced from the approximately 14 acres included with the initial filing. See Roam
supp. pf. at 4; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-7 at 1.
- 17 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 18 of 162
31.
A new control house will be installed to contain the protection and control
equipment for the new substation. Barrett pf. at 5.
3.
32.
New 345/115/45 kV Newfane Substation
The proposed Newfane substation will provide a source from one of the nearby
345 kV lines (the 360 line) to the local CVPS 46 kV subtransmission system. LaForest pf. at 19.
33.
Petitioners initially considered locating this new substation in the Town of
Dummerston. However, following an extensive public outreach effort and strong public and
local community concerns expressed about the Dummerston location, Petitioners modified their
proposal to move the substation to the town of Newfane. K. Johnson pf. at 17.
34.
The Newfane substation will consist of a new 345 kV substation, a new 345/115
kV power transformer, a new 115 kV substation, and a new 115/46 kV power transformer.
Barrett pf. at 9; Exhibit Petitioners MB-7 (aerial photograph of the location with the substation
site plan overlaid); Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-15, Supp. RR-16, Supp. RR-17 MB-10 and
Supp. RR-18 (detailed general arrangement, elevation drawings, one-line drawings, and grading
plans).
35.
The 345 kV substation will be designed as a four position ring bus, with two line
positions and two transformer positions. Barrett pf. at 9.
36.
Initially, two line positions and one transformer position will be constructed. Id.
37.
The 345 kV substation will initially contain three circuit breakers with associated
structural steel, disconnect switches, bus work and auxiliary equipment. Space has been
allocated for a future fourth circuit breaker and 345/115 kV power transformer. Id.
38.
Initially, a small portion of this substation will be constructed to provide a path
from the secondary of the 345/115 kV power transformer to the primary of the 115/46 kV power
transformer. Id. at 9-10.
39.
The 115 kV substation will initially contain one 115 kV circuit breaker with
associated structural steel, disconnect switches, bus work and auxiliary equipment. The 115 kV
substation will be designed as a four position ring bus. Id. at 10.
- 18 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 19 of 162
40.
Space has been allocated for two future 115 kV positions, including three future
115 kV circuit breakers and associated structural steel, disconnect switches, bus work and
auxiliary equipment. Id.
41.
The substation yard will be approximately 8 acres, and will be surrounded by a
chain link fence. Id.
42.
A new control house will be installed to contain the protection and control
equipment for the new substation, which is to include both VELCO and CVPS facilities. Id.;
Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-7 at 4.
4.
43.
New Newfane Loop 345 kV Line
The Newfane Loop route runs approximately 1 mile from the existing 345 kV
corridor in Dummerston to the proposed substation in Newfane. McNamara pf. at 11.
44.
A total of five design alternatives were developed and analyzed as alternatives to
the original 345 kV vertical double circuit steel tower design, leaving the existing CVPS 46 kV
line in place to its south. The alternatives evaluated included the following:





Undergrounding of the CVPS 46 kV line with side-by-side (i.e., single circuit)
wooden H-frames;
An underbuild of the CVPS 46 kV line on a horizontal wooden cross arm with
side-by-side wooden H-frames;
An underbuild of the CVPS 46kV line using compact (Hendrix style) construction
with side-by-side H-Frames;
Vertical double circuit laminated wood structures, leaving the CVPS 46kV line in
place to the south; and
Shifting the construction of the vertical double circuit steel tower structures to the
southern side of the existing CVPS 46 kV line, to analyze opportunities to take
advantage of varying topography.
Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-1 at 2-3; Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 4-5.
45.
The side-by-side single circuit wood H-frame option, leaving the existing CVPS
46 kV line in place to its south, is an optimal design based upon aesthetics and costs. Id.
46.
The use of side-by-side wood H-frames is similar to what is proposed for the main
340/360 Line ROW. Id.
- 19 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 20 of 162
47.
The current design calls for nine sets of these side-by-side wood H-frame
structures. McNamara pf. at 11; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-1 at 3; Exhibit Petitioners Supp.
RR-3.
48.
The Newfane Loop will run parallel with the existing CVPS 46 kV line in the
same corridor; the existing CVPS line is located in a 150’ wide ROW, maintained by CVPS
generally as a 100’ wide cleared corridor. McNamara pf. at 11.
49.
For the portion of the Newfane Loop entering the proposed Newfane substation,
in order to best span the West River and the field between it and River Road, and to correctly
align the lines entering the substation, a slight alignment change at the structure just east of the
West River is proposed, which would require a gradually wider ROW width, from 335’ to 443’
through the field to the proposed substation. Id. at 11-12; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-5.
50.
As the field is mostly cleared already, this should not result in significant extra
clearing, but does allow for the elimination of two of the steel pole double circuit structures
originally required for the Newfane Loop, one just west of the West River, and one just east of
the Newfane substation. McNamara pf. at 12.
51.
The centerline of the new Loop alignment will be offset to the north from the
centerline of the existing 46 kV line by 78’ and then 100’, leaving 75’ from the new Loop
centerline to the new northern edge of the overall 210-foot wide ROW. Id. at 12; Exhibit
Petitioners Supp. RR-5.
5.
52.
Expansion of the Coolidge Substation
The proposed Coolidge substation will be expanded to include a three-bay 345 kV
substation with a breaker and one half configuration, a six position 115 kV ring bus, and four
115 kV capacitor banks. Barrett pf. at 14.
53.
The location of the site is depicted on Exhibit Petitioners MB-12, which is an
aerial photograph of the premises with the substation site plan overlaid. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners
Supp. RR-19, Supp. RR-20, Supp. RR-21, Supp. RR-22, Supp. RR-23 (detailed general
arrangement drawings, one-line drawings, and grading plans).
- 20 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 21 of 162
54.
The existing 345 kV switchyard will be expanded into a three-bay breaker and
one half configuration. Barrett at 14.
55.
The north bus will be relocated approximately 30 feet to the north and the north
fence will be relocated approximately 10 feet to the north. Id. at 14-15.
56.
In addition, the west fence will be relocated approximately 10 feet to the west to
provide sufficient space for the new equipment. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners MB-12.
57.
A total of five new 345 kV circuit breakers with associated structural steel,
disconnect switches, bus work and auxiliary equipment will be installed. Barrett pf. at 15.
58.
The new substation will terminate three (3) 345 kV lines (existing lines No. 340
(345 kV Coolidge to Vernon) and No. 350 (345 kV Coolidge to West Rutland), planned line No.
360 (second 345kV Coolidge to Vernon)) and two power transformers (one existing and one
future). Id.
59.
The 115 kV substation will be expanded approximately 55 feet to the east to
provide space for two new 115 kV capacitor banks with associated circuit breakers, disconnects
and bus work. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners MB-12.
60.
In addition, all six of the existing 115 kV circuit breakers, along with their
associated disconnect switches and taps, will be replaced. The existing thermal ratings of these
devices are not adequate for the 115 kV power flows under certain contingencies. Barrett pf. at
15.
61.
The existing 115 kV circuit breakers and associated equipment will be replaced
with new 3000 Amp units. The live parts on the existing 115 kV disconnects will be upgraded to
3000 Amp units. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-7 at 4.
62.
Finally, a portion of the 115 kV switchyard will be expanded approximately 130
feet to the north to accommodate a future 345/115 kV power transformer. Barrett pf. at 15.
63.
The existing control house is large enough to accommodate the protection and
control equipment associated with the expanded substation. Id.
64.
Further analysis at the Coolidge substation identified that the existing concrete
drilled piers in the 115 kV yard have experienced significant frost action causing extensive
- 21 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 22 of 162
deformation and movement of the bus work and equipment. Accordingly, it is necessary to
replace the affected drilled piers as part of the proposed Project. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-7
at 4.
65.
Due to the location of the work needed and proximity to energized equipment, the
115 kV switchyard will need to be de-energized to the extent possible to complete this work. Id.
66.
The solution is to build a temporary bypass of the 115 kV switch yard interior to
the proposed fence limits on the north side of the yard, which will include two temporary circuit
breakers and associated equipment as well as a temporary strain bus to complete the circuit from
the existing 345kV/115kV transformer to the temporary breakers protecting the K31 and K32
lines. Id. at 4-5.
67.
A temporary work-around at the Coolidge substation of the 350 line will be
required to complete the installation of the new north bus and re-located 350 line disconnect. Id.
at 5.
68.
All temporary support structure and equipment with the exception of structure
403 on the existing 340 line will be within the proposed fence limits and will be removed at the
completion of the project. Id.
B.
Project Cost and Regional Cost Recovery
1.
69.
Project Cost Estimate
The total cost of the Project is estimated at $264,813,321. The total cost estimate
is comprised of $114,544,449 of Direct Costs, $51,269,359 of Indirect Costs, $32,056,099 in
Escalation, $22,807,861 in Capital Interest, and $44,135,553 in Contingency. Roam pf. at 8;
Exhibit Petitioners RR-2 (cost summary by resource category and Project element).
70.
In developing the cost estimate, VELCO identified the resources required to plan,
design, and construct each of the five Project elements. Roam pf. at 3.
71.
The cost estimate was developed utilizing seven (7) resources categories to
establish the total cost for each Project element. The seven (7) resource categories are as
follows:
- 22 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 23 of 162
1) Material;
2) Labor;
3) Equipment;
4) Indirects;
5) Escalation;
6) Capital Interest; and
7) Contingency.
Id.
72.
The Direct Costs were developed utilizing cost data from VELCO projects
recently completed or currently in progress. Specifically, cost data associated with VELCO’s
West Rutland to New Haven 345 kV line (the 370 Line) and the New Haven and Granite
substations were utilized to develop the material, labor and equipment costs. Id.
73.
Scopes of work for this Project for which VELCO did not have recent actual cost
data from its prior projects were estimated by PLM Electric Power Engineering, Inc. (“PLM”),
R.G. Vanderweil Engineers LLP (“Vanderweil”), and Commonwealth Associates, Inc. utilizing
cost data from other projects recently constructed in the New England area. Id.
74.
The detailed line items for each Project element were estimated by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) code. Id.
75.
Developing the cost estimates by FERC code enhances VELCO’s ability to track
costs in a manner consistent with the reporting format of actual costs as required by FERC. Id.
76.
Also, escalation costs can be more accurately calculated by applying the Handy-
Whitman cost index to the estimated costs by FERC code. Id.
77.
VELCO used a 20 percent contingency for its cost estimate, based upon guidance
from the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (“AACE”) as well as the Electric
Power Research Institute (“EPRI”). Tr. 10/29/08 at 73 (Roam).
78.
This is an appropriate contingency given where the Project stands with design and
outstanding permits. Id. at 74-75.
- 23 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 24 of 162
2.
79.
Regional Cost Recovery
Eligibility for Pool Transmission Facilities (“PTF”) regionalized cost recovery
depends upon whether the entire 51-mile line is built to solve the regional problem. Present
estimates suggest that 100% of the 345 kV line and the Coolidge and Vernon substation costs
will be borne regionally, with approximately 37% of the Newfane substation being eligible for
regional cost recovery. LaForest pf. at 23.
80.
Vermont will pay only its load ratio share of the regionalized Project costs. Id.
81.
Vermont’s share of the total Project cost is over $34 million. This includes
Vermont’s approximate $10 million share of PTF costs as well as approximately $24 million of
CVPS cost for their share of the Newfane substation. Presently, Vermont’s load ratio share of
regional costs is approximately 4.2%. The remaining almost $231 million of project cost will be
regionally supported. Id.; Roam reb. pf. at 9.
82.
VELCO anticipates that ISO-NE will treat most of the Southern Loop Project
elements as PTF and approve regional funding to pay for the Project’s costs. Roam reb. pf. at 9;
Tr. 10/29/08 at 104-105 (LaForest).
83.
Project elements that will not qualify as PTFs include the stepdown transformer
and associated equipment at the Newfane substation. Roam reb. pf. at 9.
C.
Project Schedule
84.
The estimated construction schedule is from the 3rd quarter of 2009 through the 1st
quarter of 2011. LaForest pf. at 24.
85.
A failure to achieve this schedule will likely have adverse impacts on local
reliability and overall Project cost. Id. at 24-25; see also findings herein relating to Project Need
and Project Cost.
D.
Public Outreach
86.
As part of the planning for the Project, Petitioners conducted an unprecedented
public outreach process. For the past two years, VELCO, CVPS and a group of public
- 24 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 25 of 162
stakeholder representatives have collaborated in an intensive study effort to assess and identify
potential solutions to solve the serious reliability problems affecting the southern Vermont and
regional systems. LaForest pf. at 10-11; Jones/Kirby pf. at 17-18.
87.
The public outreach process was designed and implemented to complement
Vermont’s permitting and regulatory procedures affecting the development of infrastructure
investments to meet the public’s electricity requirements. CVPS and VELCO pursued this
process to develop an improved approach for integrating Vermonters’ needs and values with the
responsibilities of the utilities to meet service challenges in a dynamic operating environment.
K. Johnson pf. at 17.
88.
The key components consisted of a Leadership Team, Background Report,
Utility Search Conference (“USC”), Community Working Group (“CWG”), Southern Loop
Open Houses, Coolidge Connector Community Working Group, Coolidge Connector Open
Houses and meetings with local planning commissions, selectboards and other community
groups. Id. at 6.
89.
To facilitate the public outreach process, the Petitioners engaged STAR Group,
LLC (“STAR Group”), an independent public facilitation consulting group with offices in
Albuquerque, New Mexico. Id.; Jones/Kirby pf. at 18.
90.
The STAR group assisted Petitioners in development of an outreach process that
consisted of facilitated public meetings, the USC, community working groups and open houses.
This process promotes broad public participation through the involvement of representative
demographic stakeholders (environmental and social advocates, emergency service providers,
local government agencies, large commercial customers, local business owners, utilities and
other affected community stakeholders). Jones/Kirby at 18.
91.
With the assistance of STAR Group, the Petitioners developed a draft Problem
Statement summarizing the transmission and distribution reliability deficiencies. K. Johnson pf.
at 6; Exhibit Petitioners KJ-3.
92.
Simultaneously, the Petitioners identified representatives of the various
stakeholder interests that Petitioners believed might be affected by the possible solution
- 25 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 26 of 162
strategies developed to address the transmission and distribution reliability deficiencies. This list
included representatives of local and regional governmental authorities, environmental advocacy
groups, emergency preparedness and response organizations, large and small electricity users,
energy advocacy groups including energy efficiency and renewables supporters, and other civic
and community based organizations. K. Johnson pf. at 7.
93.
Representatives of these interests were invited to participate in a multi-day
Utility Search Conference on the alternatives for resolving Southern Loop Reliability concerns.
Id. at 9. To prepare for the USC, participants were provided with a Background Report
prepared as a part of the outreach process. Id; Exhibit Petitioners KJ-5.
94.
Following the USC, a Community Working Group was formed to help review and
refine the recommendations made at the Utility Search Conference. K. Johnson pf. at 11.
95.
The CWG, in conjunction with the Petitioners, hosted three Southern Loop Open
Houses. The Southern Loop Open Houses were held on September 12, 13 and 14, 2006, in
Stratton, Bennington and Brattleboro, respectively. Id. at 12-13.
96.
The Open Houses provided a forum for the Petitioners and CWG members to
provide information on the electric transmission and distribution reliability deficiencies in the
electric power infrastructure in Southern Vermont to the public, to preview the alternatives and
recommendations developed through the USC and CWG process, and to receive feedback from
the public on the recommendations developed to date. Id. at 13; Exhibit Petitioners KJ-10
(exhibits that were presented at the Southern Loop Open Houses).
97.
At the first non-regulatory public meeting concerning the Southern Loop (the Star
Group’s two-day Utility Search Conference in Brattleboro in January of 2006), the USC
preliminarily recommended that CVPS proceed with its proposal to install synchronous
condensers at or near Stratton, Vermont. Jones/Kirby pf. at 18-19.
98.
The CWG later corroborated this recommendation, and went on to recommend
the implementation of the Project transmission upgrades as the preferred solution. Id.
99.
Specifically, the consensus reached by stakeholders in the public outreach process
was that the companies should build the Project and infrastructure in a manner that will
- 26 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 27 of 162
maximize future opportunities for distributed resources in Vermont. Exhibit Petitioners KJ-11;
Tr. 11/6/08 at 75-76 (Jones).
100.
Although Petitioners had conducted an 18-month public outreach initiative, after a
July 11, 2007 public hearing in West Dummerston with the Dummerston Selectboard and
Planning Commission, the Petitioners extended the filing date approximately more than 90 days
to continue local outreach work to hear and understand the priorities and concerns of local
communities. K. Johnson pf. at 16.
101.
Petitioners have had meetings with Selectboards and/or Planning Commissions, as
well as individual landowners, from each of the thirteen communities. Id.
102.
In the case of Dummerston, Petitioners met three times with representatives of
both the Selectboard and Planning Commission to identify additional substation location
alternatives. Id. at 16-17.
103.
Community discussions led to modification of the Petition and the proposal that
the needed substation be located in Newfane instead of West Dummerston. Id. at 17.
E.
Section 248(b) Findings
Orderly Development of the Region [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(1)]
104.
The Project will not unduly interfere with the orderly development of the region,
with due consideration having been given to the recommendations of the municipal and regional
planning commissions, the recommendations of municipal legislative bodies, and the land
conservation measures contained in the plan of any affected municipality. This finding is
supported by findings 105 through 243, below.
105.
The affected municipalities include: the towns of Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro,
Dummerston, Newfane, Brookline, Townshend, Grafton, and Windham, each of which is a
member of the Windham Regional Commission; and the towns of Andover, Chester, Ludlow and
Cavendish, each of which is a member of the Southern Windsor County Regional Planning
Commission. Upton pf. at 3.
- 27 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 28 of 162
Vernon
106.
The Vernon Town Plan encourages public utilities to use existing corridors in
order to minimize environmental impact and to assist desired development patterns. Upton pf. at
4 (citing Vernon Town Plan at 4 and 34).
107.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Vernon. Id. at 5.
108.
The Vernon Town Plan also states that efforts will be made by the Town of
Vernon to influence public utility companies to bury utility lines in areas of greatest scenic or
historic value, in town centers and residential subdivisions. Id. at 4-5 (citing Vernon Town Plan
at 35).
109.
The Vernon Town Plan does not contain any land conservation measures that
apply to the Project. The Plan contains a provision regarding environmental changes and
vehicular access to the Vernon Black Gum Swamp; however, the swamp is not located in the
Project area. Id. at 5.
110.
The Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of John Stamatov
address strategies regarding avoidance and minimization of impacts to natural resources. Id.;
Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. 2-16.
111.
Undergrounding is not proposed in Vernon; the new transmission lines will be
constructed in the existing utility corridor, and will not create new impacts in the areas of
concern identified in the Plan. Therefore, the additional costs of underground construction are
not justified. Upton pf. at 5-6.
112.
The Vernon Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with Selectboard and Planning Commission
members on August 21, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail. As of October 29, 2007
neither body recommended changes to the Project as designed. Id.; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
113.
Vernon did not intervene in these proceedings or file any written comments with
the Board. However, the town of Vernon representatives have expressed a strong desire not to
- 28 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 29 of 162
have any landscape plantings or berms located on operating agricultural land in the vicinity of
the Vermont Yankee plant. Tr. 11/6/08 at 153-155 (Raphael).
Guilford
114.
The proposed upgrades in Guilford are an approximately 3.7-mile portion of the
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 6.
115.
As part of its “Public Utility Corridors Policy” the Guilford Town Plan contains
the following statements: “In order to reduce their impact, new or expanded public utility
corridors . . . shall be placed, where feasible, within or parallel with existing roads and utility
rights-of-way. This will reduce their visual impact on the landscape and will also facilitate
maintenance.” There are no applicable land conservation measures in the Guilford Town Plan.
Id. at 7 (citing Guilford Town Plan at 17).
116.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to be placed within the existing utility
right-of-way. In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of Mr.
Stamatov address strategies regarding the further avoidance and minimization of visual impacts
on the landscape. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at
2-16.
117.
The Guilford Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with the Selectboard on August 27, 2007 to discuss
the Project in more detail. Neither body recommended changes to the Project as designed.
Upton pf. at 7; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
118.
The Town of Guilford did not intervene in these proceedings or file any written
comments with the Board.
Brattleboro
119.
The proposed upgrades in Brattleboro are an approximately 5.7-mile portion of
the 51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 8.
120.
The Brattleboro Town Plan notes that the Southern Loop has been identified as a
constrained transmission and distribution area and includes a policy that the town should site
energy transmission or generation corridors or facilities so as to “avoid aquifers, important plant
- 29 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 30 of 162
and animal habitats or communities, and historic resources” and “minimize their usual impact on
ridgelines, slopes and open areas.” Id. (citing Brattleboro Town Plan at 65-66 and 72).
121.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Brattleboro. The Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony
of Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of impacts to
natural and historic resources. Id. at 9; Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2;
Stamatov pf. at 2-16.
122.
There are no applicable land conservation measures in the Brattleboro Town Plan.
Upton pf. at 9.
123.
The Brattleboro Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with
Project plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with Selectboard and Planning Commission
members on August 21, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail. K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
124.
On September 17, 2007 the Brattleboro Planning Commission provided
comments on the Project. The Commission expressed conditional support for the Project,
including requests that the Petitioners adequately address ongoing energy conservation efforts,
the potential for public health impacts, and the quality of life of local residents. Id.; Exhibit
Petitioners KJ-14.
125.
The Town of Brattleboro was granted intervention in this Docket by the Board’s
Order of February 8, 2008. However, the Town did not file testimony in the proceeding, nor did
it file any comments with the Board.
126.
On September 3, 2008, the Town of Brattleboro moved to withdraw from the
Docket. The Board granted the Town’s Motion on October 1, 2008. See Order of 10/1/08.
Dummerston
127.
The proposed upgrades in Dummerston are: (1) a 1,200-foot section of the
approximately one mile, 345 kV transmission line loop between the new Newfane substation
and the new Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line, and (2) an approximately 4.9-mile portion of the
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 10.
- 30 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 31 of 162
128.
The Dummerston Town Plan includes a policy to “[l]ocate generation facilities
and transmission corridors to minimize impacts on the environment and on historic,
recreational, and scenic facilities and sites.” Id. at 10 (citing Dummerston Town Plan at 33).
129.
While there are no specific land conservation measures in the Plan, the Future
Land Use Map does identify several areas as “Conservation Resource” lands. These areas are
overlay districts, and encompass parts of a number of different underlying land use
classifications. According to the Plan, Conservation Resource lands include “those areas that
are fragile environmentally and aesthetically and/or areas that contain natural resources such as
animal habitats, cultural resources, farms or forests that should be protected for sustainable use
now and in the future.” Id. at 10-11 (citing Dummerston Town Plan at 63-64).
130.
A small portion of each element of the Project in Dummerston (the new Vernon-
to-Cavendish 345 kV line and the proposed 345 kV loop) is located in the Conservation
Resource District. Id. at 11.
131.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Dummerston. Id.
132.
The Dummerston Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with
Project plans on June 1, 2007. A public meeting was held on July 11, 2007, at which significant
concerns were expressed regarding the initial proposal to construct a 345 kV loop connecting
the proposed Vernon-to-Cavendish line with the a proposed expansion to the existing CVPS
Dummerston substation. Id. at 11-12; K. Johnson pf. at 16.
133.
As a result, the necessary substation upgrades have been relocated from the
existing CVPS substation in Dummerston to a location in Newfane that lies along the existing
CVPS 46 kV right-of-way. Upton pf. at 12.
134.
The relocation will avoid impacts to locally and regionally significant wildlife
habitat and other natural, historic, recreational, and scenic resources. Id.
135.
By maximizing use of existing rights of way, the Project also maximizes the
protection of locally-identified natural and cultural resources for sustainable use. The Project’s
environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of Mr. Stamatov discuss in further detail the
- 31 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 32 of 162
avoidance and minimization of impacts to natural and cultural resources. Id.; see Exhibit
Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at 2-16.
136.
On September 14, 2007 the Dummerston Planning Commission provided
comments on the revised proposal, which indicate support for the amended proposal with the
substation located at the Newfane site. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners KJ-14.
137.
The Town of Dummerston sponsored the testimony of Kurt Yeager regarding
Project need. See findings herein relating to Project Need. In addition, the Town sponsored the
testimony of Alex Wilson with respect to the Three-bird orchid. See generally Wilson pf.; see
also findings herein relating to Threatened and Endangered Species (discussing resolution of the
Three-bird orchid issue pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding among the Petitioners
and the Agency of Natural Resources).
Newfane
138.
The proposed upgrades in Newfane are (1) a new VELCO 345/115/46 kV
substation, (2) an approximately one-mile portion of the 51-mile, 345 kV transmission line
between Vernon and Cavendish located adjacent to the Dummerston-Newfane border, and (3) an
approximately one-mile, 345 kV VELCO transmission line loop between the new Newfane
substation and the new Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line. Upton pf. at 13.
139.
The Newfane Town Plan does not contain recommendations directly relating to
the siting of electric transmission facilities. Id.
140.
Part of the 345 kV loop will be located in an area classified as “Resource” land on
the Plan’s Proposed Land Use map. The remainder of the lines, and the substation, will be
located in “Rural” land. Id.
141.
Resource District Policies include, “Restrict development to uses and activities
that will not diminish the ecological function, scenic and natural beauty, and natural character of
these areas.” Id. (citing Newfane Town Plan at 13).
142.
Rural District policies allow a mix of residential and commercial uses, “so long as
those uses are compatible with one another and do not cause excessive noise, pollution or
- 32 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 33 of 162
disturbance.” Rural District Policies also seek to limit commercial development to “paved
roads.” Id. at 14 (citing Newfane Town Plan at 14).
143.
The proposed 345 kV lines will be located within and adjacent to an existing
transmission corridor, avoiding any major changes to the scenic value or natural character of the
area. Id.
144.
As explained in the Project environmental report and testimony of Mr. Stamatov,
line construction and maintenance will not reduce the ecological function of the area. Id.; see
Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at 2-16.
145.
The new Newfane substation will be accessed from Route 30, will replace an
existing gravel extraction operation, and will not cause excessive noise or pollution. Upton pf. at
14.
146.
The Newfane Town Plan contains a discussion of the special land use problems
that are posed by sand and gravel operations. Id.
147.
The Plan states, “By their very nature, sand and gravel pits can be one of the most
visibly destructive intrusions of any local land use regularly practiced in Newfane.” Id. (citing
Newfane Town Plan at 43).
148.
The Newfane substation will reduce the local effects identified in the Newfane
Town Plan, and ensure the reclamation of the existing sand and gravel pit. Id.
149.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Newfane. Id. at 15. In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic
reports and testimony of Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding avoidance and minimization
of impacts to scenic and natural resources. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners
MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at 2-16.
150.
The Newfane Town Plan does not contain any land conservation measures. Id.
151.
The Newfane Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with Selectboard and Planning Commission
members on August 16, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail – including the proposal to
place the substation in Newfane. Upton pf. at 15; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
- 33 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 34 of 162
152.
The Selectboard held a public meeting on September 17, 2007 for the purpose of
receiving public input on the substation plans and issued Preliminary Comments on September
18, 2007. Upton pf. at 15; Exhibit Petitioners KJ-14.
153.
The Town of Newfane was granted intervention in this Docket by the Board’s
Order of February 8, 2008. However, the Town did not file testimony in these proceedings, did
not file any formal comments with the Board, nor did it raise any concerns with respect to the
Project’s potential aesthetic impacts.
Brookline
154.
The proposed upgrade in Brookline is an approximately 3.8-mile portion of the
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 16.
155.
The Brookline Town Plan does not contain recommendations directly relating to
the siting of electric transmission facilities. Id.
156.
The Plan’s Scenic Resources Map includes the land located between Grassy
Brook Road and Hill Road, an area crossed by the existing and proposed transmission lines. Id.
157.
The Plan contains a land use policy to require public utilities to “minimize the
impact on the environment and to assist desired development patterns.” Id. (citing Brookline
Town Plan at 39).
158.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to make use of the existing utility
corridor in Brookline, which will effectively minimize any impacts on natural resources and
areas identified as important scenic resources. Id. at 17.
159.
In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of
Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of impacts on natural
and scenic resources. Id. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at 216.
160.
There are no relevant land conservation measures in the Brookline Town Plan.
Upton pf. at 17.
161.
The Brookline Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with Selectboard and Planning Commission
- 34 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 35 of 162
members on September 5, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail.
Neither body
recommended changes to the Project as designed. Id.; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
162.
The Town of Brookline intervened in these proceedings, though later withdrew its
opposition to the Project.
Townshend
163.
The proposed Project upgrade in Townshend is an approximately 9-mile portion
of the 51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 17.
164.
The Townshend Town Plan seeks to ensure that public utility companies have
demonstrated that they are maximizing efficiencies and assisting customers in energy
conservation before constructing additional generation and transmission facilities. Id. at 18
(citing Townshend Town Plan at 25).
165.
The Plan encourages new transmission proposals to use existing rights way and
corridors. Id. (citing Townshend Town Plan at 25).
166.
In those areas designated as Resource Lands, the Plan contains a policy to
“[c]onstruct corridors for new energy transmission facilities only when needed, and then adjacent
to and parallel to existing operational energy transmission facility corridors. Minimize their
visual impact on ridge lines, slopes, and open areas, and avoid important natural resources.” Id.
(citing Townshend Town Plan at 9).
167.
CVPS has undertaken extensive energy conservation measures in its service area
in this area, and continues to look for ways to maintain reliable service through the use of
targeted conservation efforts. Id. at 19.
168.
In addition, the Project environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of Mr.
Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of environmental and
aesthetic impacts. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at
2-16.
169.
The Plan does not contain any land conservation measures. Upton pf. at 19.
170.
The Townshend Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with
Project plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with Selectboard and Planning Commission
- 35 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 36 of 162
members on August 22, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail. Neither body recommended
changes to the Project as designed. Id.; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
171.
The Town of Townshend was granted intervention in the Docket by the Board’s
Order of February 8, 2008. However, the Town did not file testimony or any written comments
with the Board.
Grafton
172.
The proposed upgrade in Grafton is an approximately 1-mile portion of the 51-
mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 20.
173.
The Grafton Town Plan does not contain any language specifically related to the
siting of electric transmission facilities. Id.
174.
The Plan generally encourages the minimization of impacts on water quality,
wildlife habitat, recreation, and scenic resources. Id. (citing Grafton Town Plan at 10-17).
175.
The Project will be located within an existing transmission right of way, thereby
avoiding and minimizing scenic and natural resource impacts to the greatest extent feasible. Id.
176.
In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of
Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of environmental and
aesthetic impacts. Id. at 20-21; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2;
Stamatov pf. at 2-16.
177.
There are no land conservation measures in the Plan. Upton at 21.
178.
The Grafton Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and the Grafton Town Administrator indicated that the Town had no
concerns with the Project. Id.; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
179.
The Grafton Selectboard indicated its support of the Project in its letter dated
September 20, 2007. Upton pf. at 21; Exhibit Petitioners KJ-14.
180.
The Town of Grafton did not intervene in these proceedings, nor did it file any
written comments with the Board.
- 36 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 37 of 162
Windham
181.
The proposed upgrade in Windham is an approximately 5.3-mile portion of the
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 21.
182.
The Windham Town Plan under the heading of “Prospective Situation” for public
utilities, states, “[a]ll utility construction must be contained in existing corridors.” Id. at 22
(citing Windham Town Plan at 16).
183.
The proposed line will be constructed entirely within an existing right of way. Id.
184.
There are no land conservation measures in the Windham Town Plan. Id.
185.
The Windham Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with Selectboard members on August 13, 2007 to
discuss the Project in more detail. Neither body recommended changes to the Project as
designed. Id.; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
186.
The Town of Windham did not intervene in these proceedings, nor did it file any
written comments with the Board.
Andover
187.
The proposed upgrade in Andover is an approximately 4.1-mile portion of the 51-
mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 23.
188.
One of the goals of the Andover Town Plan is to “accommodate the necessity of
[electrical facilities and transmission lines] while minimizing the economic, aesthetic and
environmental impact on the town.” Id. (citing Andover Town Plan at 9).
189.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Andover, which will minimize economic, aesthetic, and environmental
impacts. Id. In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of Mr.
Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of aesthetic and
environmental impacts. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at
2-16.
190.
The Andover Town Plan does not contain any land conservation measures. Upton
pf. at 23.
- 37 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 38 of 162
191.
The Andover Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and the Selectboard discussed the project at its meeting of August 13,
2007. Neither body recommended changes to the Project as designed. Id.; K. Johnson pf. at 1617.
192.
The Town of Andover did not intervene in these proceedings, nor did it file any
written comments with the Board.
Chester
193.
The proposed upgrade in Chester is an approximately 5.2-mile portion of the 51-
mile, 345 kV transmission line between Vernon and Cavendish. Upton pf. at 24.
194.
The Plan’s Utilities and Facilities section contains several Electric Utilities
Policies. Policies that appear applicable to transmission lines include:
-
“Provide residents with safe, effective and efficient utility service.”
-
“New utility lines should be placed along existing corridors whenever possible;
multipurpose use of utility corridors is encouraged.”
-
“Aesthetic and natural resource impacts should be considered when placing
utility lines.”
-
“Promote underground electric lines where possible and practical.”
Id. at 25 (citing Chester Town Plan at 31-32).
195.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Chester. Id.
196.
In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of
Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of natural resource
and aesthetic impacts. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov
pf. at 2-16.
197.
Particularly in light of the existing transmission corridor and the design
considerations regarding aesthetics and environmental impacts, it is neither necessary nor
practical to place the proposed transmission line underground in Chester. Upton pf. at 25.
198.
The Chester Town Plan does not contain any land conservation measures. Id.
- 38 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 39 of 162
199.
The Chester Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007. Neither body recommended changes to the Project as designed. Id. at 26;
K. Johnson at 16-17.
200.
The Town of Chester did not intervene in these proceedings, nor did it file any
written comments with the Board.
Ludlow
201.
The proposed upgrade touches the southeast corner of Ludlow as the line crosses
from Chester into Cavendish. Upton pf. at 26.
202.
The Electrical Services goals and implementation sections of the Ludlow Town
Plan include statements that the placement of electric lines and facilities should be evaluated for
health, safety and aesthetic concerns, and that the use of existing infrastructure and services
should be encouraged. Id. at 27 (citing Ludlow Town Plan at 6-3).
203.
The Plan also encourages efforts to improve efficiency and reduce peak demands.
Id. (citing Ludlow Town Plan at 6-2 and 6-3).
204.
The Project is a component of a larger planning process which includes extensive
efforts to improve efficiency and reduce peak demands. Id.
205.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility rights of way in an around Ludlow. Id.
206.
In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of
Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of environmental and
aesthetic impacts. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at
2-16.
207.
The Ludlow Town Plan does not contain any land conservation measures. Upton
pf. at 27.
208.
The Ludlow Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with the Planning Commission and Town Manager
on August 21, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail. Neither body recommended changes to
the Project as designed. Id. at 27-28.
- 39 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 40 of 162
209.
The Town of Ludlow did not intervene in these proceedings, nor did it file any
written comments with the Board.
Cavendish
210.
The proposed upgrades in Cavendish are an expansion of VELCO’s Coolidge
substation and an approximately 5.5-mile portion of the 51-mile, 345 kV transmission line
between Vernon and Cavendish. Id. at 28.
211.
The Plan’s Utilities and Facilities section contains several Electric Utilities
Policies. Policies that appear applicable to transmission lines include:
-
“New utility lines should be placed along existing corridors whenever possible;
multipurpose use of utility corridors is encouraged.”
“The location or relocation shall not have a negative impact upon aesthetic and
natural resources.”
“The town encourages the installation of underground utility lines for new
construction.”
Id. at 28-29 (citing Cavendish Town Plan at 23).
-
212.
The Petitioners have designed the Project to optimize the use of the existing
utility corridor in Cavendish. Id. at 29.
213.
In addition, the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony of
Mr. Stamatov address strategies regarding the avoidance and minimization of natural resource
and aesthetic impacts. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at
2-16.
214.
Particularly in light of the existing transmission corridor and the design
considerations regarding aesthetics and environmental impacts, it is neither necessary nor
practical to place the proposed transmission line underground in Cavendish. Upton pf. at 29.
215.
The Cavendish Town Plan does not contain any land conservation measures. Id.
216.
The Cavendish Selectboard and Planning Commission were provided with Project
plans on June 1, 2007, and VELCO staff met with members of the Selectboard and Planning
Commission on August 13, 2007 to discuss the Project in more detail. Neither body
recommended changes to the Project as designed. Id. at 29-30; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
- 40 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 41 of 162
217.
The Town of Cavendish was granted intervention in the Docket by the Board’s
Order of February 8, 2008. The Town served discovery requests on the Petitioners; however, it
did not file any testimony or written comments with the Board and did not oppose the Project.
Windham Regional Commission
218.
The Windham Regional Plan identifies the Southern Loop as an important
regional consideration and acknowledges that CVPS and VELCO have undertaken a major
planning project that is focused on identifying and implementing needed improvements to the
Southern Loop area. Upton pf. at 30; Exhibit Petitioners TOU-15 (Windham Regional Plan at
46).
219.
Windham Regional Plan places the Southern Loop in the context of other
components of the New England power system which are “older and less robust than in some
parts of the U.S.” Upton pf. at 30-31 (citing Windham Regional Plan at 46).
220.
Energy policies include the following:
-With regard to all energy generation, transmission and distribution projects:
 Adhere to a high environmental standard that includes avoiding negative
environmental impacts to the extent possible and adequately minimizing
and mitigating those that cannot be avoided;
 Conduct thorough and proper studies and analyses of all anticipated
socioeconomic and environmental impacts, both positive and negative;
 Adequately address all areas of concern regarding proposed developments;
and
 Effectively and adequately address all issues related to facility operation
and reliability, recognizing that in some instances they are inextricably
intertwined with public health and safety concerns.
-With regard to new or improved energy transmission or distribution facilities:
 Prefer and select existing transmission and distribution corridors over
creation of new corridors;
 Avoid extension of energy transmission or distribution facilities into or
through Resource Lands; and
 Avoid extension or alteration of energy transmission or distribution
facilities in any manner that would significantly impact Resource Lands or
significantly diminish important natural resource values.
-Avoid extension of energy transmission or distribution facilities, or other utility
services into or through Resource Lands, or near them in a manner that
significantly reduces their resource values.
- 41 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 42 of 162
Id. at 31-32 (citing Windham Regional Plan at 47.)
221.
For areas identified as “Rural Lands” the Plan’s Land Use policies include:
-Avoid extension of roads, energy transmission or distribution facilities, or other
utility services into or through Resource Lands.
-Construct corridors for new energy transmission or distribution facilities only when
needed, and then only within or adjacent to existing operational energy transmission
facility corridors to the maximum extent possible. Minimize their visual impact on
ridgelines, slopes and open areas, and avoid important natural and historic resources.
Id. (citing Windham Regional Plan at 32.)
222.
The Project is the primary product of the planning process mentioned in the Plan
and is designed to improve reliability in the area of the Southern Loop. Id. at 33.
223.
The Petitioners have thoroughly analyzed the environmental and socioeconomic
aspects of transmission planning. Id.
224.
The Project is located almost entirely within Rural Lands, according to the Plan’s
Proposed Land Use map, including a significant area identified as Resource Lands. Id.
225.
The Project will be located almost entirely within an existing operational
transmission right of way, adjacent to an existing VELCO transmission facility. Id.
226.
The proposed Newfane substation and associated connecting loop will be built in
and adjacent to an existing CVPS transmission line, and was proposed only when necessary,
after making significant investments in efficiency and load management. Id.
227.
As explained in the Project’s environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony
of Mr. Stamatov, the Project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts on natural and
aesthetic resources. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at
2-16.
228.
Because Resource Lands occupy nearly half the land area of the Region, and
because the Project was designed to make use of an existing operational transmission right of
way rather than create a new corridor, extension of the proposed line through Resource Lands
cannot be avoided. Upton pf. at 33-34.
- 42 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 43 of 162
229.
The Project design nonetheless avoids any reduction in the resource value of these
areas, and meets the overall goals for transmission planning and construction expressed in the
Plan. Id.
230.
The Windham Regional Commission was provided with Project plans on June 1,
2007. Id.; K. Johnson pf. 16-17.
231.
In addition, Executive Director Jim Matteau was a member of the Community
Working Group. Upton pf. at 34; K. Johnson pf. 11-12.
232.
The Windham Regional Commission did not offer testimony, or recommended
changes to the Project as designed. Upton pf. at 34.
Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission
233.
The Southern Windsor County 2003 Regional Plan states that efficient
infrastructure adequate to support economic or other growth should be created prior to
development. Id. at 35; Exhibit Petitioners TOU-16 (Southern Windsor County 2003 Regional
Plan at 8).
234.
The Plan includes a goal to “direct the placement of transmission lines to support
designated village, commercial and industrial development.” Id. (citing Southern Windsor
County 2003 Regional Plan at 29).
235.
Like many of the town plans identified above, the Plan also prefers that
transmission and distribution facilities be built in existing corridors. Id.
236.
Policies include: “Location and expansion of utilities and facilities should occur
in areas best able to serve the public interest with the fewest negative side effects”; and
“Multipurpose use of existing utility corridors and placement of new lines or extension in
existing corridors is encouraged wherever possible.” Id. (citing Southern Windsor County 2003
Regional Plan at 29-30).
237.
Consistent with the Southern Windsor County 2003 Regional Plan, the Project is
designed to improve the electric transmission system, making the electric infrastructure system
more dependable and supporting local and regional land use planning and development efforts.
Id. at 35.
- 43 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 44 of 162
238.
The Project includes the use of existing transmission corridors in the Region. Id.
at 35-36.
239.
In addition, the Project has been designed to minimize potential negative side
effects of construction, as explained in the environmental and aesthetic reports and testimony.
Id. at 36; Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2; Stamatov pf. at 2-16.
240.
The Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission was provided with
Project plans on June 1, 2007. Upton pf. at 36; K. Johnson pf. at 16-17.
241.
In addition, Executive Director Tom Kennedy was a member of the Community
Working Group. Upton pf. at 36; K. Johnson pf. at 11-12.
242.
The Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission indicated its
support of the Project in its letter dated September 20, 2007. Upton pf. at 36; Exhibit Petitioners
KJ-14.
243.
The Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission did not intervene
in these proceedings or file any written comments with the Board.
DISCUSSION
Section 248(b)(1) provides in pertinent part that, before the Board may issue a certificate
of public good for an in-state facility, the Board shall find that the facility “will not unduly
interfere with the orderly development of the region with due consideration having been given to
the recommendations of the municipal and regional planning commissions, the recommendations
of the municipal legislative bodies, and the land conservation measures contained in the plan of
any affected municipality.” 30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(1).
We conclude that the proposed Project will not unduly interfere with the orderly
development of the region. We base this conclusion upon the examination, pursuant to Section
248(b)(1), of the local and regional plans for the affected communities. It is important to note
that under Section 248’s statutory language, the proposed Project does not need to conform to the
requirements of these plans, only that this Board give due consideration to the land conservation
measures in such plans and the recommendations of the affected local and regional planning
commissions and legislative bodies.
- 44 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 45 of 162
Both the Vermont Supreme Court and this Board have previously construed the effect
that the Board is to give to municipal enactments under this statutory provision. In City of South
Burlington v. VELCO, 133 Vt. 438 (1975), the Court held that the legislature’s use of the phrase
“due consideration” “at least impliedly postulates that municipal enactments, in the specific area,
are advisory rather than controlling.” Id. at 447. The Court further stated that, without a “clear
and explicit legislative pronouncement” it would not construe Vermont’s statutes “in any manner
giving single municipalities the power to subvert utility projects statewide in scope and broadly
entrusted to a single planning and supervisory agency.” Id. at 447-48, quoted in In re: Northwest
Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 200-01.
The effects of the proposed Project on the orderly development of the region are limited
by the use of the existing transmission corridor and existing substations for the vast majority of
the Project. See In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at
203, citing Petition of VELCO, Docket No. 4381, Order of 3/6/80 at 4-5 (“By paralleling the
existing corridor … a proposed [transmission line] routing has been chosen that has already been
considered in the developmental aspects of the community by both public and private
endeavors”). Further, the siting of the new Newfane substation and loop reflect the preferences
of the involved communities not to expand at the previously considered Dummerston site.
It is also important to note that the Project will enhance the reliability of electric service
in southern Vermont and in the state as a whole, as discussed in the findings under Section
248(b)(2) of this Order. In this way the Project may enhance the orderly development of the
region. Id.
Need for Present and Future Demand for Services [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(2)]
244.
The Project is required to meet the present and future demand for services which
could not otherwise be provided in a more cost-effective manner through energy conservation
programs and measures and energy efficiency and load management measures. This finding is
supported by findings 245 through 448.
- 45 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 46 of 162
Regional and National Reliability Standards
245.
The New England transmission system is a fully integrated regional power
system. Most of the transmission lines are fairly short and networked as a grid, resulting in close
inter-relationships of electrical performance in all corners of the system. Kowalski pf. at 7.
246.
The massive outage that struck the North American electric power system on
August 14, 2003, causing the loss of approximately 2,500 MW of load in New England, has
underscored the significance of a reliable bulk power transmission system. Id. at 6.
247.
A well coordinated regional transmission system plan and additional power
system infrastructure are more essential than ever to ensure reliability of service to load, because
without a well-planned system, there may not be operating options available to maintain reliable
service. Id.
248.
Transmission planning is a process that involves a number of stages including
developing a model of the bulk power systems, using this model to assess the performance of the
system for a range of operating conditions and contingencies, determining those operating
conditions and contingencies that have an undesirable reliability impact, identifying the nature of
potential options, and developing and evaluating a range of solutions, taking into account the
time needed to place the solution into service. Laforest/Diebold pf. at 11.
249.
ISO-NE was established as the Independent System Operator of the New England
bulk power grid on July 1, 1997. The “Independent System Operator” concept was developed by
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) as part of a framework to support
competitive electricity markets. Kowalski pf. at 3-4.
250.
In June 2001, FERC conferred authority upon ISO-NE to be responsible for the
regional transmission planning process, and in June 2003, FERC confirmed the ISO-NE’s
authority to approve planning for upgrades and changes to supply and demand-side resources.
Id. at 4 (citations omitted).
251.
Pursuant to its mission, ISO-NE must maintain a level of system reliability that
meets criteria established by NEPOOL, the NERC Corporation (“NERC”) and the Northeast
Power Coordinating Council (“NPCC”). Id. at 6.
- 46 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 47 of 162
252.
NERC has been designated as the Electric Reliability Organization, or ERO,
charged by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) to enforce mandatory
compliance with federal standards on power system design, among others. LaForest/Diebold pf.
at 5.
253.
NERC oversees a number of regional councils, one of which is the NPCC.
Kowalski pf. at 8.
254.
NERC has established a general set of mandatory rules and criteria applicable to
all geographic areas. NPCC has a set of rules and criteria particular to the Northeast, although
they also encompass the more general NERC standards. Id.
255.
In turn, ISO-NE has developed standards and criteria specific to New England
that coordinate with the NPCC rules. Id.
256.
Similar standards exist throughout the nation and other portions of North
America. Id.
257.
As a transmission operator of Vermont’s high voltage transmission facilities (115
kV and above), and pursuant to the restated New England Power Pool Agreement and the New
England Open Access Transmission Tariff, VELCO’s transmission system must meet the design
and operating reliability criteria of ISO-NE, the NPCC, as well as national Reliability Standards
established by NERC. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 4.
258.
Overall, these criteria all seek to satisfy one overarching objective – to ensure a
robust electric system that can deliver electric energy to the sub-transmission and distribution
systems served by the transmission owners. Without this objective, the probability of
widespread electric outages to many customers is increased significantly. In other words, the
reliability objectives seek to keep the lights on in the region, generally, and in specific areas of
transmission need, particularly. Kowalski pf. at 8.
259.
VELCO and CVPS also have an obligation pursuant to Vermont law to provide
reliable and adequate electric service to Vermont. In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project,
Docket No. 6860 Order of 1/28/05 at 9 (citing 30 V.S.A. § 219).
- 47 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 48 of 162
260.
The reliability standards of ISO-NE and NPCC require that the interconnected
bulk power supply system be designed with sufficient transmission capability to serve forecasted
loads under representative contingencies as defined in the criteria, and they apply after any one
critical element has already been lost. This is referred to as the N-1-1 criterion.
LaForest/Diebold pf. at 6-7; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-2 (ISO-NE Planning Procedure No. 3,
Reliability Standards for the New England Area Bulk Power Supply System); Exhibits
Petitioners DLL/CD-3 (NPCC Basic Criteria for Design and Operation of Interconnected Power
Systems) and DLL/CD-4 (NPCC Bulk Power System Protection Criteria).
261.
The second paragraph of Section 3.0 of Planning Procedure No. 3 states that
testing needs to be performed with the system reasonably stressed in terms of applicable
transfers, load and resources. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 7.
262.
No violations of the ISO-NE Reliability Standards are permitted under the
criteria. That is, even a system that has only one violation of the criteria is not in compliance.
Kowalski pf. at 14.
263.
The NERC Standards for transmission planning consist of six Reliability
Standards (TPL-001-0 through TPL-006-0) that are applicable to transmission planners, planning
authorities and regional reliability organizations. These Reliability Standards are intended to
ensure that the transmission system is planned and designed to meet an appropriate and specific
set of reliability criteria. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 7; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-5.
264.
The NERC Reliability Standards address types of simulations and assessments
that must be performed to ensure that systems are developed to reliably meet present and future
system needs (TPL-001-0 – TPL-004-0) and that the information required to assess regional
compliance with planning criteria and for self-assessment of regional reliability is available and
accurate (TPL-005-0 – TPL-006-0). LaForest/Diebold pf. at 7-8.
265.
These assessments consider system performance with all facilities in-service
(TPL-001-0), system performance with a single facility lost (TPL-002-0), and with multiple
facilities lost (TPL-003-0 and TPL-004-0). Id. at 8; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-5.
- 48 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 49 of 162
266.
Effective June 4, 2007, VELCO, its owners and possibly Vermont ratepayers may
face enforcement actions including penalties of up to $1,000,000 per day per infraction if
VELCO fails to maintain its system according to the Federal Reliability Standards. LaForest pf.
at 9-10.
267.
Whether developed by NERC, NPCC, or ISO-NE, the standards and criteria
applicable to the New England transmission system are applied in a deterministic fashion in
order to assess the ability for it to perform under a series of defined contingency situations.
Specifically, these standards and criteria dictate a set of operating circumstances or contingencies
under which the New England transmission system must perform without experiencing
overloads, instability, or voltage violations. Kowalski pf. at 8-9. 13
The Regional Transmission System Problems
268.
The Plattsburgh-to-Sandbar, Vermont 115 kV or “PV20” line and the Highgate
HVDC Converter are two of the most critical transmission system elements on the Vermont
system. Laforest/Diebold pf. at 11.
269.
The Highgate HVDC Converter is over twenty years old and by many accounts is
within a decade of potential retirement based on expected equipment lifetime and maintenance
needs. A converter valve hall fire, which has befallen all other converters of Highgate’s age,
would make the facility unusable for at least a year. Id.
270.
In addition, failure of the converter transformer would place the facility out of
service for many days at least. Since the converter transformers are unique, the transformers
cannot be replaced by similar units found elsewhere within the industry. Id. at 11-12.
271.
The PV20 115 kV line has two sets of underwater cables in Lake Champlain that
are 1.8 miles in length and over fifty and thirty-five years old, respectively. The PV20 circuit
also has an underground cable along the two miles of the Route 2 causeway. This underground
13 Note that the standards applicable to the regional transmission system do not apply to the sub-transmission
systems operated by Vermont’s distribution utilities including the CVPS 46 kV system that is the subject of this
proceeding. See Appendix E of Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-4 (CVPS Southern Loop/Brattleboro Area Study and
Synchronous Condenser Report) for a detailed explanation of the reliability criterion utilized by CVPS in Project
planning for the resolution of the Southern Loop’s 46 kV subtransmission reliability deficiencies. Jones/Kirby pf. at
20-22.
- 49 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 50 of 162
cable is already ten years old, while the Sand Bar phase-shifting transformer has been in-service
for over three years now. All of these elements have the potential for long-duration outages
following failure and may result in the long-term loss of the power system element in question.
Id. at 12.
272.
In accordance with the N-1-1 requirement, VELCO’s planning analyses model the
system after loss of either of these critical facilities followed by the loss of another system
element. Loss of the PV20 line is a more limiting contingency, or outage, which results in a
more limited transmission network, where system performance is compromised at a lower
Vermont state load level (by about 35 MW) than in the Highgate-out scenario. This means that
the long term loss of the PV20 circuit is more limiting than the Highgate-out scenario. Id.
273.
VELCO has studied scenarios in detail, using industry standard analysis and
modeling tools, and the best comprehensive system model available. This model includes a
detailed model of projected Vermont loads. In addition, it models interconnected systems of
northeastern United States with various probable power transfer scenarios. Smith pf. at 15.
274.
In addition, reliability and stability analyses performed by VELCO have been
given detailed peer review and approval by the appropriate NEPOOL task forces comprised of
industry experts. Id.
275.
VELCO’s PSLF load flow software, in conjunction with a contingency processor,
simulated numerous combinations of load-flow base cases and contingencies. Over 90,000 loadflow contingency simulations have been processed. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 13.
276.
Transmission planning analyses for this Project reveal that the transmission
system in Vermont will not meet NERC Transmission Planning Standard TPL-003-0, titled
“System Performance Following Loss of Two or More Bulk Electric System Elements (Category
C).” Id.
277.
Category C outages (or outages including the loss of two or more elements)
include those tests that account for our “N-1-1” design standard as used and studied within New
England, which is the specific portion of the standard that the Vermont transmission system
violates. Id. at 10.
- 50 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 51 of 162
278.
Acceptable system performance for these types of events requires stable system
performance with thermal and voltage performance within the applicable rating or limits. Id.
279.
The Vermont transmission system violates both thermal and post-contingency
voltage criteria for loss of the Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line (the “340 line”). Id.
280.
The reliability standards of NPCC and ISO-NE must at least conform to those of
NERC. Since system performance violates NERC standard TPL-003-0, the studied system
performance also violates NPCC and ISO-NE standards. Id. at 11.
281.
The chief outage of concern is loss of the Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line. This
line can carry 45% or more of Vermont’s total demand on peak days and even higher if either the
PV20 tie with New York or the Highgate DC Converter are unavailable. LaForest/Diebold pf. at
13-14.
282.
The existing Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line serves critical east – west and
north – south energy transfers within New England and into and out of New York. Id. at 14.
283.
If this 345 line is lost, numerous 115 kV lines can be overloaded in multiple
states, potentially resulting in voltage collapse and blackouts impacting an area extending from
north of the Capital District Area in New York (Albany, Schenectady and Troy) through Glens
Falls, Saratoga and Whitehall, into central and northern Vermont, and to areas in and around
central and northern New Hampshire. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-10.
284.
In this scenario, it is likely that the system voltage could degrade in moments.
This voltage degradation could result in line relays being “fooled” by high reactive power flows
and low voltages into believing that an actual line fault exists, as opposed to low voltage
phenomena following an outage. These relays, if they act in this manner, would take action
within roughly a half second to a few seconds. This would most likely occur in New York in the
115 kV network north of the Albany / Troy area and south of Whitehall. LaForest/Diebold pf. at
15-16.
285.
Approximately 1000 MW of Vermont load, 580 MW of New York load, and 250
MW of New Hampshire load is at risk of voltage collapse or blackout in the event of an outage
involving this 345 kV line. Id. at 17; Exhibit DLL/CD-11.
- 51 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 52 of 162
286.
Results demonstrating the need for the Project are included in numerous VELCO
planning analyses, including the Northwest Vermont Reliability Project (“NRP”) Critical Load
Milestone Study, Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-6, the 2006 Vermont Transmission System 10
Year Long Range Plan Analysis, Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-7, the Southern Loop Project
Analysis Summary and Update, Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-8, and the 2012 VELCO System
Assessment, Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-9.
287.
The regional reliability problems addressed by the Southern Loop Project were
identified as the next needed significant system upgrade in the Critical Load Study prepared by
VELCO for the NRP. In that study, VELCO reported that a PV20 outage with loss of the
Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line would result in voltage collapse at an 1165 MW load level
(with NRP upgrades in service). LaForest pf. at 11-12; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-6.
288.
The need for the Southern Loop Project was also identified in the VELCO 2006
Long Range Transmission Plan Analysis, where VELCO reported that it is the most significant
problem on the system. LaForest pf. at 12; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-7.
289.
As a result, VELCO and the other signatories to the Docket No. 7081
Memorandum of Understanding (“Docket 7081 MOU”) identified the Southern Loop Project as
part of the transition plan set forth in the Docket 7081 MOU. LaForest pf. at 12.
290.
VELCO planning studies filed in November, 2007 for this proceeding indicated
that under a given set of assumptions, the existing system begins to violate thermal and voltage
criteria, post-contingency, at a Vermont load level of 1155 MW. Smith pf. at 11.
291.
After consideration of the Petitioners’ testimony and discovery responses, the
Department’s experts requested that VELCO perform further analysis to address remaining
questions on the issue of target load level. This analysis reveals that the target load level
triggering the need for this Project should be reduced to a statewide target or need load level of
945 MW. Smith pf. at 12-14.
292.
Specifically, four factors, when taken into consideration, result in a system load
serving capability that is 210 MW less than the 1155 MW target load level described in
- 52 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 53 of 162
VELCO’s prefiled testimony. This results in the revised target load level, for the year 2011, of
945 MW. Id. at 14.
293.
These four factors are:
1) - 35 MW attributable to the expected load level in adjacent states and throughout the
NEPOOL system in year 2011;
2) - 100 MW attributable to a change in the post-contingency voltage level from 0.92 per
unit (92% of nominal rated voltage) to the ISO-NE standard of 0.95 per unit;
3) - 35 MW to account for the droop effect of the dynamic var devices on the VELCO
system14; and
4) - 40 MW to account for absence of a New Hampshire generator15.
Smith pf. at 13-14.
294.
The Vermont transmission system has experienced two significant events just
over the past two summers that resulted in poor system voltage performance that risked, and in
one case resulted in, load shedding or voltage collapse. LaForest pf. at 16.
295.
A recent event in New York which stressed the Vermont 345 kV tie forced
VELCO to ask New York operators to shed approximately a hundred MWs of load in New York
to avoid widespread blackouts, potential damage to equipment and risk to human safety. Id.
296.
The Vermont critical load level for this Project is influenced not only by Vermont
load levels but also by adjacent local and regional load levels, regional power transfer conditions
and system modeling updates. Id. at 12-13.
14 The dynamic reactive power devices on the VELCO system, namely the Essex STATCOM and Granite
synchronous condensers, regulate voltage at points on the VELCO network. Load flow simulations assume that
these devices regulate voltages perfectly; i.e., that they restore voltage at their control buses to 1.0 per unit. In
reality, to ensure stable operation, these devices allow the voltage to droop on the order of 3% (0.03 per unit) at their
control buses during maximum output, which results in lower post-contingency voltages at various points on the
system. Smith pf. at 13.
15 Consistent with ISO-NE planning criteria, planning studies need to consider the absence of generation resources
that have a substantial impact on post-contingency performance. A sizeable unit in New Hampshire has a significant
impact on VELCO=s load serving capability and as such, studies should assume that this unit may be off line.
- 53 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 54 of 162
297.
Studies reveal significant changes in the New York model north of
Schenectady/Albany, as well as noteworthy load growth in New Hampshire and the remainder of
New England. These changes, when reflected in the power system models, resulted in
significant increases in existing Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line flow. Id. at 13.
298.
That is, as regional load grows, the existing Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line
supplies not only increased Vermont load, but also supplies a portion of increased regional
demand in adjacent areas. Load levels modeled in New Hampshire have a noticeable impact. Id.
299.
The impact of load growth outside of Vermont on the Vermont “need” level for
this Project is non-linear. As New England peak load increases, Vermont peak load must
actually decrease, to maintain system reliability without the additional 345 kV line. Id.
300.
Load levels modeled in New Hampshire have a noticeable impact. ISO-NE’s
2007 CELT forecast predicts that these loads will increase at a rate of 2.5 to 3% per year over the
next five years. Id.
301.
The second regional reliability problem arises if the Vermont Yankee 345/115 kV
transformer located at the Vermont Yankee substation in Vernon (at the southern end of the
Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line) is lost. This transformer connects the New England 345 kV
network to the local 115 kV system, which in turn supplies load in southeastern Vermont
(Brattleboro and surrounding areas) and southwestern New Hampshire. LaForest/Diebold pf. at
20.
302.
Loss of this transformer places all local loads in southeastern Vermont and
southwestern New Hampshire on the 115 kV network supplied solely out of the Public Service
Company of New Hampshire (“PSNH”) network in New Hampshire, and CVPS’ 46 kV network
supplied remotely from Bennington. Id. at 20-21.
303.
Loss of this 35+ year old transformer may result in a shutdown of the Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Plant. Id.
304.
There are few, if any, local options for alternate supply at or near peak summer
demand levels. Id. at 21.
- 54 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 55 of 162
305.
Outages on these remaining local transmission (115 kV) and local sub-
transmission (46 kV) facilities lead to loss of local load until the lost facilities are restored. Id.
306.
In these scenarios 30 to 50 MW of CVPS load in southeastern Vermont and 150
to 200 MW of load in southwestern New Hampshire could be lost. Id.
307.
At present day load levels and system configuration, and in the interim before
transmission reinforcements may be implemented, the transmission system is vulnerable to
voltage sags, thermal overloads, loss of customer load, and possibly widespread voltage collapse.
Smith pf. at 4; Kowalski pf. at 11.
308.
From a reliability perspective, Vermont presents a threatening combination of
growing summer peak demand, limited transmission capacity, and extremely limited generation
that is effectively integrated to serve the demand. Kowalski pf. at 10.
309.
As a result, there must be a robust transmission system in place to import needed
electricity into and around this region. However, the amount of electricity that the existing
transmission system can import from other areas and transmit within the southern region of
Vermont is limited in its ability to provide reliable service while sustaining losses of facilities on
the transmission system, putting the region at an unacceptable risk of loss of service to load due
to a cascading system failure, or blackout. Id. at 11.
310.
The Northeast Blackout of August 14, 2003 is clear evidence that if voltage
collapse occurs, it can spread in a matter of seconds over a large geographic area, creating
massive blackouts and resulting damages and loss. Id. at 12.
311.
There are two consequences of an uncontrolled blackout. First, it is often difficult
to accurately predict how large an area will be affected by a blackout, and as a result, it could
encompass the entire northeastern United States, as happened in 1965 and again on August 14,
2003, when parts of the Midwest and Canada were also affected along with the Northeast.
Second, it may result in electric system equipment damage that will hamper restoration of
service, thus prolonging outages, and making efforts to remedy the system more expensive. Id.
- 55 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 56 of 162
312.
Overloading of transmission lines not only can lead to voltage collapse, but it can
also cause poor voltage performance and thermal overloads. Low voltages reduce the ability of
appliances and machinery to function. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 17.
313.
Some appliances will not run below a specified voltage level, and prolonged
operation at reduced voltage can prematurely age or damage an appliance. High voltage may
damage equipment, such as computers, light bulbs, and televisions. Large voltage changes, a
phenomenon that occurs on weaker transmission systems, can be noticeable to individuals and
especially to sensitive equipment, such as computers and certain manufacturing machinery. Id.
at 17-18.
314.
These voltage changes are not just a nuisance; they can affect manufacturing
processes and result in significant financial loss. The impact of even momentary power
disturbances can be quite severe in technology manufacturing facilities, like IBM’s. Poor
voltage performance can result in significant production and financial losses. Id. at 18; see
Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-17 (testimony of Robert G. Lang to the Vermont House Commerce
Committee, October 29, 2003).
315.
Thermal overloads accelerate equipment aging/deterioration, may cause
irreversible damage to transmission equipment, such as transformers, and present a public safety
risk. The consequence is that conductors can sag below safe clearances and transformers can
burn out. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 18.
316.
While transmission lines can normally be repaired in a matter of hours, other
types of equipment, such as transformers, can require weeks or months to be repaired or
replaced. Id.
317.
The lead time to replace a transformer is in the range of nine to eighteen months.
The long lead times needed for procurement and construction of replacement equipment would
significantly reduce the ability of the system to reliably serve load in the interim. Id. at 18-19.
Local Reliability on the CVPS System in Southern Vermont
318.
Originally, the Southern Loop Project was part of a study area included in the so-
called Southern Loop Area Specific Collaborative (“Southern Loop ASC”), Docket No. 6806.
- 56 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 57 of 162
The Southern Loop ASC considered the reliability concerns over the CVPS 46 kV
subtransmission loop between Bennington and Brattleboro. Over time, analyses of CVPS
southern loop reliability issues expanded to consider possible synergies with projects that could
address VELCO system deficiencies and other regional reliability needs. Smith pf. at 3.
319.
The areas served by CVPS’s 46 kV Southern Loop experienced strong growth in
electric demand during the 1960s and 1970s, driven largely by the expansion of the ski resorts
and related electric customers. In 1970 the radial spurs of 46 kV transmission emanating from
Brattleboro and Bennington were extended and tied together to increase system strength and
redundancy. This subtransmission circuit came to be known as the CVPS Southern Loop.
Kirby/Jones pf. at 7.
320.
By the early 1980s it appeared that demand growth in this target area might soon
surpass this system’s capability, particularly during transmission line or transformer
contingencies (i.e. failures) on the 46 kV loop itself or on the overarching 115 kV system.
Accordingly, in 1983 CVPS filed a petition under 30 V.S.A. § 248 seeking a Certificate of Public
Good to construct the Chester-Londonderry 46 kV line extension, in order to provide another
source of transmission supply near the loop’s weak center. Id.
321.
The Board denied this petition, citing several weaknesses in Central Vermont’s
application in its Order of April 10, 1986 in Docket No. 4782. Id.
322.
Growing electric demand has been addressed by two principal means: (1) the
installation of switched shunt capacitors along the loop to prop up its voltage; and (2) the use of
demand side management (“DSM”) to ease the system’s burden. Id. at 8.
323.
These DSM measures have included interruptible contracts for the ski resorts,
end-use fuel switching, load control, and conservation and efficiency programs. Some of the
DSM programs are now administered by Efficiency Vermont (“EVt”), Vermont’s energy
efficiency utility or “EEU”. Id.
- 57 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 58 of 162
324.
Additionally, a second 115/46 kV transformer was added at the Woodford Road
Substation in Bennington in 1995 in order to provide redundancy16 and to share the demand with
the original transformer, which was becoming vulnerable to overload for some contingencies.
Id.
325.
Today, the two main strategies for managing demand growth in the target area
have run their course and are now becoming ineffective at managing further growth solely by
themselves. Id.
326.
The aggressive use of DSM has shifted much of the peak customer demand to off-
peak hours, leading to increasingly long periods of high demand with a less distinct peak period
and a higher area demand factor or load factor. These high load periods occur primarily during
winter months. Id. at 8-9; Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-4, Appendix H.
327.
This demand shift has led to an unacceptably high risk of voltage collapse,
because a critical contingency may occur during the increasing long periods of system
vulnerability. Id. at 9.
328.
An extensive planning study by CVPS, with input from VELCO, identified five
distinct root problems in southern Vermont that affect the reliability and adequacy of service in
this target area and must be resolved. These are listed below.
Root Problem #1 - The present-day CVPS Southern Loop subtransmission system
is vulnerable to an unplanned loss of a transmission line or a transformer much of
the time.
Root Problem #2 - The present-day Brattleboro area system is vulnerable to an
unplanned loss of a transmission line or a transformer 100% of the time.
Root Problem #3 - The southern Vermont system (and the southwestern New
Hampshire system) are both vulnerable to a long-term outage of the T4 345/115
kV transformer at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.
16 This redundancy benefits not only the CVPS Woodford Road substation, but may also benefit the CVPS Vernon
Road substation, because it creates the opportunity for one of the two Woodford Road units to be moved to Vernon
Road in the event that its sole 115/46 kV transformer failed. Of course, VELCO owns and operates the Bennington
transformers and would have to agree to the relocation of one of them.
- 58 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 59 of 162
Root Problem #4 – Central Vermont’s Southern Loop subtransmission system
will soon be unable to supply peak demand within the target area even with all
facilities in service, due to demand growth.
Root Problem #5 - Future problems that are related to the southern Vermont
system will soon have the possibility of impacting the wider regional transmission
system including most of Vermont.
Id. at 10.
329.
Based on the assumptions used, loads fed by the Southern Loop subtransmission
system are subject to local blackouts for credible contingencies even at moderate load levels.
This results in exposure to blackouts with present day loads for more than 50% of the time. This
exposure increases with future load growth. Even with all lines in service, sometimes referred to
as the n-0 condition, if no transmission upgrades are made, the existing southern loop
configurations will become unable to maintain voltage and serve peak loads in the 3-5 year time
frame. Smith pf. at 16-17.
The Proposed Project Addresses Both the Regional and Local Reliability
Problems and will also Bring the System into Conformance with National and
Regional Reliability Standards
330.
Following input obtained from an extensive two-year public engagement effort,
the Petitioners recommend a second, 51-mile, 345 kV transmission line (the “360” line) to be
located within VELCO’s existing transmission right-of-way that extends from VELCO’s
Coolidge substation located in Cavendish, Vermont, to a proposed new 345 kV substation to be
located slightly north of Entergy’s existing Vermont Yankee substation in Vernon, Vermont.
LaForest pf. at 11.
331.
The 360 line would help to solve the local reliability problem in the Southern
Loop area (by means of a 345/115/46 kV interconnection to the Southern Loop subtransmission
46 kV line at Newfane) as well as solve the regional reliability problem. Id.
332.
With the completion of the second Coolidge-to-Vermont Yankee 345 kV line,
loss of one 345 kV line in the corridor still leaves the other to perform the necessary network
- 59 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 60 of 162
function within this corridor from the regional bulk system perspective. LaForest/Diebold pf. at
24.
333.
Breaker failures at Entergy’s Vermont Yankee 345 kV substation can result in
both the loss of the 340 line and other key power system elements. Thus a breaker failure on
either side of the existing Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV or 340 line termination can result in a
weaker system with poorer system performance than loss of the line itself. Loss of the breaker
between the 340 line and the Vermont Yankee unit (breaker “1T”) results in both the loss of the
340 line and over 600 MW of generation. Id. at 19-20.
334.
The loss of generation in combination with loss of the 340 line further degrades
the system’s voltage and thermal performance. Loss of the other 340 line terminal breaker at
Vermont Yankee (the “79-40” breaker) results in coincident loss of both a key north-south 345
kV line and an east-west 345 kV line, with degraded system voltage performance and an
increased likelihood of voltage collapse. Id.
335.
These breaker-failure scenarios could result in the loss of load in the magnitudes
described earlier with the timing of voltage collapse potentially much quicker (due to higher
loadings on weak transmission lines and poorer voltage performance making it more likely that
relay systems may act automatically to sectionalize the system). Id.
336.
These breaker-failure scenarios are potentially more likely in the Vermont Yankee
substation because the protection and control equipment is old and does not conform fully to the
modern standards for a BPS substation. For example, the relays employ technology no longer
supported by manufacturers, which means no spare equipment exists except for those parts
gleaned from decommissioning identical relays elsewhere and cannibalizing the mothballed relay
for parts for the in-service unit. Id. at 20.
337.
With the addition of the new 345 kV line or any other additional facility, the
substation at Vermont Yankee needs to be upgraded to meet compliance with NERC, NPCC and
ISO-NE design standards for a BPS substation. Id.
- 60 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 61 of 162
338.
In addition, the Project will result in a new substation in Vernon, just north of the
Vermont Yankee substation, which will address the breaker-failure contingencies by removing
key elements of the local power system from adjacent breaker positions within the new Vernon
substation. Id.
339.
A second 345/115 kV autotransformer will be installed in this new substation,
removing the local load reliability susceptibility for loss of the sole Vermont Yankee 345/115 kV
autotransformer. Id.
340.
In addition to improving the reliability of the Vermont transmission system, the
stronger, more stable transmission system resulting from the Project will provide a more robust
framework with regard to generation in Vermont, as well as providing this area access to
generation from elsewhere in Vermont and New England. This will reduce congestion that
results from operational reliability constraints. Smith pf. at 19-20.
341.
The added transmission strength afforded by the Project will result in added
stability and power quality benefits, particularly through redundancy of the added 345 kV line
from Vernon to Coolidge. Id. at 20.
342.
The presence of a second line substantially reduces the shock to the system
caused by electrical faults on either line and subsequent loss of that line. The presence of the
second line from Vernon to Coolidge will also provided additional operational flexibility and
provide enhanced windows of opportunity to perform system maintenance. Finally, the addition
of the second 345 kV line affords loss savings. Id.
343.
With all lines in service, and with load levels estimated by VELCO for year 2014,
the Vermont loss savings are on the order of 3.6 MW. The corresponding New England loss
savings are on the order of 10 MW. Id.
344.
By addressing these deficiencies, the Project will also bring the system into
conformance with national and regional reliability standards. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 24.
345.
The Project addresses the local CVPS reliability problem in southern Vermont by
including a new injection point to the 46 kV Southern Loop (new Newfane 345/115/46 kV
substation and one-mile 345 kV loop line between the Newfane substation and the Vernon-to-
- 61 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 62 of 162
Coolidge 345 kV line), complementing the ongoing CVPS development of the Kendall Farm
Substation, delivery of geo-targeted energy efficiency to the Southern Loop target area, and the
CVPS efforts to promote the implementation of customer-cited generation in areas served by the
46 kV sub-transmission system. Jones/Kirby pf. at 4, 16-17, 24-26; Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-6
at 21; KJ/LK-8 at Table F.
Transmission Alternatives Evaluated
346.
The Southern Loop Project is the optimal solution among the potential alternative
transmission solutions available. See Hahn pf. at 6; Jones/Kirby pf. at 16; Exhibit Petitioners
KJ/LK-7.
347.
In the 2006 Vermont Transmission System 10-year Long Range Plan Analysis,
VELCO evaluated four alternative transmission upgrades to solve the reliability problem created
by the contingencies. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 35; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-7.
348.
Later refinement of the preferred transmission alternative was carried out by
VELCO and is documented in Exhibit Petitioners DLL-CD-8 (VELCO Southern Loop Analysis
Summary and Update).
349.
The analysis included evaluation of two alternatives in the Vermont Yankee-to-
Coolidge right of way, with each involving a new transmission line in parallel with the existing
340 line. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 35.
350.
One option modeled the new line operating at 345 kV with the 340 line operated
at 115 kV, while the other option modeled both the new line and the 340 line operating at 345
kV. Id. at 35-36.
351.
The 115 kV operating option would have required a reactive power device at
Coolidge, causing that option to be substantially more costly, by at least $50 million. Tr.
10/29/08 at 115-116, 118 (LaForest); Exhibit Petitioners LaForest Supp. 1.
352.
In addition, the 115 kV operating option may have a useful life of only 2 to 5
years, in terms of ability to defer the 345 kV option, and at the new lower Project need load level
of 945 MW, the 115 kV operating option may not work at all. Tr. 11/6/08 at 21-22 (LaForest).
- 62 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 63 of 162
353.
The other two options modeled new 345 kV lines coming out of 345 kV
substations in New Hampshire and terminating at VELCO’s Coolidge substation.
LaForest/Diebold pf. at 36.
354.
The proposed Vermont Yankee-to-Coolidge 345 kV line is the preferred
transmission alternative. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-9.
355.
The Coolidge Connector component of the Southern Loop Project mitigates
reliability concerns and the potential violations of reliability criteria by providing an alternative
path for power flow into the Central and Northwest Vermont load zones. Hahn pf. at 6.
356.
It involves fewer miles of construction of new transmission facilities than other
transmission alternatives considered and evaluated by VELCO, and, therefore, is less costly. Id.
357.
It utilizes existing rights of way (“ROWs”) already owned by VELCO. Id.
358.
The construction of the Coolidge Connector component of the Southern Loop
Project will also facilitate the resolution of reliability and capacity issues on the 46 kV subtransmission line from Brattleboro to Stratton to Bennington. Id.
359.
Combining both the 340 line and 360 line circuits on the same set of poles is an
unacceptable design because it would leave the system exposed to a double circuit fault and
potential voltage collapse. See Tr. 11/6/08 at 110 (Smith).
360.
The Project is superior to all available transmission alternatives in that it employs
synergies to provide least-cost transmission solutions to both regional and local needs. Smith pf.
at 4.
361.
The Newfane 345/115/46 kV substation and one-mile 345 kV loop line between
the Newfane substation and the Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line provide a critical reinforcement
to the CVPS 46 kV subtransmission system and are part of an integrated solution to the CVPS
reliability problem in southern Vermont. Jones/Kirby pf. at 11.
362.
In combination with the other strategies being implemented by CVPS, the
Newfane substation and loop mitigate reliability concerns affecting the areas served by the
CVPS 46 kV subtransmission system in Southern Vermont. Id.
- 63 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 64 of 162
363.
These project elements were found to be part of the optimal solution to resolving
the local reliability concerns affecting CVPS’s southern Vermont service area. Jones/Kirby pf.
at 16; Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-7.
Non-Transmission Alternatives (“NTAs”)
364.
NTAs can consist of energy efficiency (“EE”), demand response (“DR”), or local
generation, or various combinations thereof. Hahn pf. at 4.
365.
As previously noted, for the past several years, VELCO, CVPS and a group of
public stakeholder representatives collaborated in an intensive study effort to assess and identify
potential solutions to solve the serious reliability problems affecting the southern Vermont and
regional systems. LaForest pf. at 10-11; findings 268-329.
366.
In addition, both companies undertook extensive analysis of potential NTA
solutions to the local and regional system problems. See findings 378-430, below.
367.
In addition to the extensive transmission planning undertaken by VELCO, CVPS
conducted loadflow, economic, and other analyses to understand the subtransmission system
problems endemic to southern Vermont, and to identify cost-effective solution options. This
effort concluded with the issuance of two summary reports in January of 2006, respectively titled
Southern Loop Utility Search Conference Background Report and CVPS Supplemental Technical
Report [for] Southern Loop (Exhibits Petitioners KJ/LK-517 and Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-6,
respectively). Kirby/Jones pf. at 12.
368.
By encouraging the comparison of various options’ effectiveness and costs, these
two reports sought to provide a rational basis for determining the overall merit of each option
and for option selection, although neither report actually attempted to make that final selection.
Kirby/Jones pf. at 13.
369.
The principal components of the Southern Loop Project transmission upgrades,
together with a synchronous condenser installation at the new CVPS Kendall Farm substation,
17 Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-5 is identical to Exhibit Petitioners KJ-5 and may be found under that cover, in order
to avoid duplication.
- 64 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 65 of 162
and incremental energy efficiency and customer-sited distributed generation, were subsequently
recommended through the public engagement process, in which the two reports formed the
foundation of the information provided to the public participants. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK6 at 21.
370.
The consensus reached by stakeholders in the public outreach process was that the
companies should build the Project and infrastructure in a manner that will maximize future
opportunities for distributed resources in Vermont. Exhibit Petitioners KJ-11; Tr. 11/6/08 at 7576 (Jones).
371.
The Project incorporates plans for energy efficiency and customer-sited
distributed generation in order to defer a potential 115 kV Project component. Findings 378-386.
372.
The proposed Newfane Substation and interconnection with the 46 kV
subtransmission system cannot be deferred by non-transmission alternatives, and is the most
cost-effective solution among potentially available transmission alternatives. Exhibit Stipulation
5 at para. 5.
373.
The need for the Project cannot be satisfied by cost-effective generation and
efficiency alternatives. Lamont pf . at 3; see also findings 387-430, below.
374.
The 345 kV option as proposed by VELCO and modified by recommendations of
Department witnesses, is the preferred least-cost option. Id.
375.
As noted in the testimony of Mr. Horii, the analysis on need and consideration of
alternatives was quite involved, consistent with the emphasis of the Board and the legislature on
the consideration of alternatives. In the end, however, alternatives to the proposal cannot reduce
peak loads below the peak threshold need levels identified by the Department’s expert, Mr.
George Smith, of 945 MW. Id.
376.
This threshold was established based on the Department’s request for
supplemental analysis, discussed above. Even under the most optimistic and aggressive
assumptions regarding generation, DR, and efficiency, the net load cannot be reduced to a point
of avoiding or deferring the Project. Id; see supra findings 294-299.
- 65 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 66 of 162
377.
The Project is also the most cost-effective and robust solution to solve the severe
reliability exposures faced by both the regional and local system networks. See findings 395403, below.
NTAs Studied for the Local Reliability Problems
378.
CVPS undertook a long process of analytical studies that resulted in the
development of ten “Strategic Solution Options,” each of which was designed to address all of
the root problems. Kirby/Jones pf. at 11.
379.
A new synchronous condenser installation at the CVPS Kendall Farm substation,
recently approved by the Board in Docket No. 7246, was an integral component of eight of these
ten solution options and presented few lost opportunities in the cases of the remaining two. Id.
380.
Due to its broad commonality, and because it could promptly remedy two of the
most pressing root problems (#1 and #4), the synchronous condenser installation was
“decoupled” from the rest of the option components and put on a faster track for implementation
by CVPS. Id.
381.
In addition, La Capra was retained by CVPS to perform an analysis of the
potential for distributed generation in the area of Vermont served by the existing 46 kV line from
Brattleboro to Stratton to Bennington. Hahn pf. at 4; Exhibit Petitioners RSH-4.
382.
On March 28, 2008, CVPS received Board approval for construction of
synchronous condensers and associated Kendall Farm substation equipment at Winhall.
Kirby/Jones pf. at 11.
383.
The synchronous condenser, together with the Project’s Newfane substation and
loop (connecting the 360 line to the local 46 kV network), in conjunction with deployment of
energy efficiency and customer generation to reduce local peak demand, will defer other
transmission elements otherwise needed for to address the local reliability concerns in southern
Vermont. Id.
384.
Specifically, a significant element of the initial Southern Loop Project upgrades, a
previously identified approximately 49 mile, 115 kV line upgrade to an existing 46 kV line from
- 66 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 67 of 162
Brattleboro to Stratton to Bennington, is being deferred by CVPS with a combination of
synchronous condensers and EE. Hahn pf. at 23.
385.
CVPS plans to defer this Project component by implementing up to 28 MW of
demand side management (“DSM”) and encouraging cost-effective customer-generation.
Kirby/Jones pf. at 11.
386.
The consequences of failure (i.e., that the EE NTAs will not be implemented, or
will not effectively serve as a reliable alternatives to a new transmission line) are relatively low
in deferring this element of the transmission upgrade, as any outages, although important, will
only affect a limited geographic area within Vermont. Hahn pf. at 23.
NTAs Studied for the Regional System Problems
387.
VELCO contracted with La Capra Associates (“La Capra”) to evaluate NTAs.
LaForest/Diebold pf. at 47; Exhibit Petitioners RSH-2.
388.
La Capra examined a broad set of potential NTAs to the Coolidge Connector
component of the Southern Loop Project, including energy efficiency (“EE”), demand response
(“DR”), new generation resources, and various combinations thereof. LaForest/Diebold pf. at
48.
389.
Four Alternative Resources Configurations, or “ARCs”, have been identified as
potential alternatives to the Project:
ARC 1: Achievable EE and DR, plus three new 25 MW combustion turbine units
ARC 2: Eight new 25 MW combustion turbine (“CT”) units
ARC 3: Achievable EE plus three new 25 MW CT units
(installed earlier than assumed in ARC 1)
ARC 4: Achievable EE and DR, plus three new 25 MW wood-fired biomass units.
Exhibit Petitioners RSH-2 at 1.
390.
ARC 1 and ARC 4 are identical except for the type of new generation installed.
ARC 1 includes three 25 MW CTs, while ARC 4 included three 25 MW biomass plants. Id.
- 67 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 68 of 162
391.
An “all EE” ARC is not feasible, as there is insufficient EE potential to
accomplish this goal. In other words, you need the full EE potential and something else. Hahn
pf. at 9; Tr. 10/29/08 at 52-53 (Hahn).
392.
The amount of EE that is available to serve as a NTA was estimated by Optimal
Energy. This was done by first estimating the achievable potential for EE in the Northwest and
Central zones, and subtracting out a projection of what is likely to be implemented anyway
without regard for specifically geographically targeting NTAs in the Northwest and Central load
zones. Hahn pf. at 10.
393.
The EE savings assumed by LaCapra’s study exceeds the Department’s forecasted
EE savings by 43 MW in 2016. Id. at 11.
394.
In order to achieve this unprecedented level of EE savings identified in ARC 1,
Vermont’s annual spending on EE would need to increase dramatically to $67 million in 2016,
which is more than double the 2008 budget approved for Efficiency Vermont. Total spending on
EE programs over ten years would need to be approximately $592 million. Id. at 10-11.
395.
La Capra Associates evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the ARCs against each
other and as compared to the Coolidge Connector component of the Southern Loop Project. For
economic comparisons, LaCapra evaluated societal costs, system costs, capital costs, impact of
regional cost support through Pool Transmission Facilities (“PTF”) rate treatment, and relative
rate impacts. Exhibit Petitioners RSH-2 at 2.
- 68 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 69 of 162
Summary of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
VELCO COOLIDGE CONNECTOR - NON-TRANSMISSION ALTERNATIVES
SUMMARY OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSES
NPV 2007 - 2022
All Figures in 1,000's of 2007 Dollars
Vermont Societal Costs [1]
Transmission
ARC1
ARC2
(Coolidge
Connector)
Achievable EE
+ DR + CT
Generation)
(All CT
Generation)
1,200,400
1,244,658
44,258
1,085,993
(114,406)
1,207,469
7,069
0%
159,412
15%
747
0%
122,222
11%
1,076,125
1,019,425
(56,700)
1,160,310
84,185
1,015,324
(60,801)
1,093,469
17,344
109,007
11%
52,307
5%
193,193
20%
48,207
5%
126,352
13%
1,076,125
1,019,425
(56,700)
1,160,310
84,185
1,015,324
(60,801)
1,121,755
45,630
109,007
11%
52,307
5%
193,193
20%
48,207
5%
154,637
16%
Relative to the Transmission Alternative
$ difference in societal costs from lowest case
% difference in societal costs from lowest case
System Costs [2]
115,153
11%
Relative to the Transmission Alternative
$ difference in system costs from lowest case
% difference in system costs from lowest case
System Costs w/o PTC's
Relative to the Transmission Alternative
$ difference in system costs from lowest case
% difference in system costs from lowest case
Effective Firm Capacity in 2016
System Cost per firm kW
Capital costs paid by Vermont ($millions)
With PTF Treatment
Without PTF Treatment
Illustrative Retail Cost in 2016 (cents/KWH)
Difference in revenues 2007 to 2016 (nominal$)
1,085,246
(115,153)
ARC3
ARC4
Achievable EE
+ CT
Achievable EE
Generation + DR + Biomass
earlier)
Generation)
-
400
2,700
166
6,100
158
7,300
152
6,700
166
6,800
13
258
517
517
359
359
500
500
735
735
16.40
17.60
17.00
17.60
18.40
153
118
155
265
-
[1] Assumes no PTF treatment for the Coolidge Connector, no Production Tax Credit or REC revenues for new renewable projects,
and no Forward Capacity Market revenues for new generators or new DSM. DSM risk adjustment and externailites are included.
[2] Assumes PTF treatment for the Coolidge Connector, Production Tax Credit and REC revenues for new renewable projects,
and Forward Capacity Market revenues for new generators or new DSM. DSM risk adjustment and externailites are included.
396.
Associated with each ARC’s economic outcomes are different capital
requirements and rate impacts. The Coolidge Connector component of the Southern Loop
Project (the TA) has the lowest capital costs to Vermont (approximately $13 million assuming
PTF rate treatment as compared to ARC 4 at $735 million, ARC 1 at $517 million, and ARC 3 at
$500 million). Hahn pf. at 16.
- 69 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 70 of 162
397.
The TA also yields the lowest average retail rates. By contrast, ARC 4 produces
the highest rates. Id.
398.
From the perspective of the Vermont Societal Test, ARC 1 has the lowest net
present value (“NPV”) societal costs, followed very closely by ARC 3 and then the transmission
alternative (“TA”) followed closely by ARC 4. Id. at 15-16.
399.
The costs for ARC 1 and ARC 3 are very close, with a slight edge to ARC 1 in
societal costs. Assuming wood-fired biomass units continue to receive a production tax credit
(“PTC”) currently available to renewable energy projects over the life of these assets, REC
revenues, PTF rate treatment for the Coolidge Connector, and FCM market revenues for new
generation and DSM, ARC 3 has the lowest net present value (“NPV”) of system costs. Id.
400.
ARC 1 has the next lowest system costs, followed by the TA. These three
scenarios yield NPV of system costs that differ by approximately $60 million between one
another, or 6% of the total costs. Without the PTC but with PTF rate treatment and FCM
revenues, ARC 3 has the lowest NPV of costs, followed by ARC 1, and then the TA. Without
PTCs, the differences in the NPVs of system costs narrow slightly. Id. at 16.
401.
ARC 2, the all-CT solution, has higher societal and system costs than the TA, but
has the second lowest capital costs. Id.
402.
No single combination of options ranked consistently superior (i.e., lowest cost)
in each of the categories considered. For example, the transmission alternative has the lowest
capital requirements and rate impacts, but the third lowest NPV societal costs. Id. at 19.
403.
ARC 1 has low societal costs, but very high capital requirements and rate impacts.
404.
In addition to evaluating the comparative cost-effectiveness of the alternatives,
Id.
LaCapra evaluated the feasibility of the alternatives. Id. at 20; Exhibit Petitioners RSH-2,
Appendix F.
405.
The reliability concerns being addressed by VELCO are primarily driven by load
levels, particularly in the Northwest and Central load zones. LaCapra used a critical load level of
- 70 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 71 of 162
1155 MW in developing the ARCs, as this was previously the target load level for Project need
at the time the petition was submitted in this proceeding in November, 2007. See Hahn pf. at 4.
406.
As noted previously, more recent system studies (including the studies conducted
for the Department) show that this target load level has dropped dramatically, to 945 MW
(estimated). Smith pf. at 14.
407.
The impact of this change is that it would require even more energy efficiency or
generation to meet the system needs, on a rough order of magnitude costing about $200 million
more than reflected in the report for the NTAs. See Tr. 10/29/08 at 42 (Hahn).
408.
The development, construction, and operation of energy resources, including
transmission, EE and DR, is difficult, and the selection of each resource within one or more
ARCs carries some implementation risks. Id.
409.
Prudent utility planning requires that such risks be assessed and factored into any
conclusions that might be drawn from this analysis and any implementation strategy that might
result. Hahn pf. at 24-25
410.
The transmission alternative involves some permitting risk, but once built,
transmission lines present little operating risk, but are subject to outages primarily due to trees
and storm events that can be managed with proper right-of-way maintenance. Id. at 25.
411.
The transmission alternative proposed here utilizes an existing right of way,
which removes significant implementation barriers. See id.
412.
Generation options also present permitting and siting risk, and present additional
operating and cost risk over their lives. Id.
413.
Some generation options, such as biomass plants, have potential for benefits from
the ISO-NE energy markets, but these benefits are affected by the price of wood fuel. Id.
414.
The risks associated with implementing individual EE measures and programs are
generally low, but there is uncertainty regarding the long-term sustainability of the required
budgetary commitments, particularly at the levels assumed in ARC 1. Id.
415.
The Achievable EE scenario calls for utility expenditure of $594 million over the
next ten years, 100% more than currently budgeted for Efficiency Vermont. See id. at 25-26.
- 71 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 72 of 162
416.
This requires a substantial, long-term increase in state-wide EE budgets. The
approval of such an aggressive budget is uncertain over the extended period of time needed for
full implementation and realization of the requisite EE. Id. at 26.
417.
In addition, an important source of uncertainty is the fact that no utility has ever
sustained such large distributed resource commitments for so long in so many markets
simultaneously and actually achieved the relative magnitudes of peak demand savings projected
over the next decade as indicated in this report. Id.; Kleinman pf. at 8.
418.
As compared to the rest of the country, Vermont and Efficiency Vermont are
already at the aggressive end as far as amounts expended on efficiency. Tr. 10/29/08 at 50
(Hahn).
419.
VELCO has also analyzed the technical effectiveness of implementing the ARCs
in an effort to evaluate their ability to meet system reliability criteria while comparing system
performance to that of the Project. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 47.
420.
The nature of the analysis is to model the ARCs in the load-flow software used by
VELCO to study the transmission system using the methods defined in the NERC, NPCC and
ISO Planning Criteria. Id. at 48.
421.
ARC 1 failed to perform acceptably, as the system generally overloaded one or
both of the typically limiting transmission corridors identified in the analysis (one in New York
and another in Vermont) and/or failed to meet the post-contingency voltage criterion. Id. at 4950; Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-8.
422.
The ARCs that did perform acceptably only met the criteria minimally with
respect to voltage criterion and are typically within one to ten percent of maximum allowed postcontingency thermal ratings on the critical circuits. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 49.
423.
Given this result, the set of ARCs and a few sensitivity ARCs (i.e., versions of
ARC 1 with additional / front-loaded generation) were considered. The outcome was that only
those ARCs with an added generation component performed acceptably. Id. at 50.
424.
The generation components of the various ARCs also have a geographic
limitation, in that generation sited in central Vermont close to the northern end of the existing
- 72 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 73 of 162
Vermont Yankee-to-Coolidge 345 kV line performed better than generation sited further away in
northwestern Vermont. Id.
425.
In summary, the ARCs perform better with a well-placed generation component
due to the ability of the generation considered here to provide reactive support, and resulting
voltage support, in addition to displacing real power. Id. at 53.
426.
The transmission alternative performs best due to its inherent robustness. Id.
427.
This is exemplified by the difference in post-contingency loading on the
transmission system seen with the Project and in the post-contingency voltage profile also seen
with the Project in-service. Id.
428.
The system with the Project transmission upgrades, for the load levels examined,
did not load up any transmission corridor to within 10% of its maximum post-contingency
thermal limit, while the NTA ARCs commonly did so to multiple transmission circuits. Id.
429.
The system with the Project has a post-contingency voltage profile (after loss of
the existing 340 line or proposed 360 line) which can accommodate unanticipated changes in
presumed reactive resources to meet ongoing power factor needs; the tested ARCs could not
accommodate those reactive resource changes without consequent changes (resource additions)
in the ARC. These latter points are just a few measures of the Project’s robustness when
compared to the ARCs. Id.
430.
To help bridge reliability until the Project can be placed into service, CVPS has
sought and acquired 25 MW of OP 4 demand response until the Southern Loop Project can be
built. Exhibit CVPS Cater-Bentley-1; Tr. 11/6/08 at 176-77 (Bentley).
Town of Dummerston Position Regarding Project Need
431.
The Town of Dummerston offered testimony of Kurt Yeager, Director of the non-
profit Galvin Electricity Initiative and former president of the Electric Power Research Institute,
in which Mr. Yeager disputed that the Project was needed to provide reliable electric service to
Vermont customers, arguing instead that Vermont should implement certain “smart grid
technology” and non-transmission alternatives to supplant the need for the transmission upgrade
proposed by the Petitioners. See Yeager pf. at 3-5.
- 73 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 74 of 162
432.
Mr. Yeager contends that existing electricity distribution networks are “the last
bastion of an outmoded analog, electromechanically controlled network” and are “overloaded
and subject to blackouts.” Id. at 4.
433.
Mr. Yeager offers six smart grid “solutions” as alternatives to the Southern Loop
Project, which he argues could increase the capacity of the Vernon-to-Cavendish line by an
estimated 30 to 50 percent, while reducing the power demand on the Coolidge Connector and
eliminating the need for new power lines, as well as eliminating the security vulnerabilities in the
electric grid. His recommendations include:

Employing Flexible AC Transmission System (“FACTS”) to digitally control
the power delivery network;

Integrating smart sensors and communications technology for real-time power
and information exchange;

Installing advanced metering infrastructure (“AMI”) to create a two-way
energy/information portal;

Integrating distributed energy resources;

Accelerating end-use efficiency through advances in digital electric
technology; and

Reconductoring the existing Vernon-to-Cavendish line to ease thermal and
voltage constraints.
Id. at 7.
434.
The non-specific measures recommended by Mr. Yeager are not a viable
alternative to the proposed Southern Loop Project. VELCO has already accounted for the impact
and potential use of these measures to resolve Vermont’s reliability concerns, and Mr. Yeager’s
proposals are wholly inadequate to address the potential of a widespread system blackout that the
Project is designed to prevent. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 27, 29.
435.
Similarly, the DPS does not believe that Mr. Yeager’s proposals offer specific
solutions to the reliability problems Vermont faces and do not present a viable alternative to the
proposed Project. See Smith reb. pf. at 1, 7.
- 74 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 75 of 162
436.
VELCO applies today’s sophisticated technologies in an appropriate manner. Id.
437.
We find that reconductoring the existing 340 line will not solve the reliability
at 6.
problem; the system planning studies do not indicate a problem with a lack of capacity on the
340 line. Instead, the fundamental reliability problem facing Vermont and the neighboring states
is due to a contingency involving the loss of the 340 line. Id. at 28; see also Smith reb. pf. at 2
(noting that Mr. Yeager “misses the main point”; the contingent loss of the 340 line is the
“primary concern that needs to be addressed”).
438.
Reconductoring a transmission line with a higher capacity conductor will do
absolutely nothing to improve power system performance if loss of the transmission line itself is
the fundamental contingency of concern, as is the case here. If the 340 line is lost, most of
Vermont, as well as portions of New York and New Hampshire are susceptible to widespread
outage. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 28-29.
439.
Simply increasing the capacity of the existing Vernon-to-Cavendish line “does
nothing to help the situation when this line is lost as a contingency.” Smith reb. pf. at 2.
440.
Moreover, VELCO has already employed a number of the technologies Mr.
Yeager advocates. For example, VELCO, in fact, has one of the first US, utility-based FACTS
device installations (a +/-75 MVAR STATCOM) at its Essex substation. The device provides
voltage support during system events, and was installed to defer transmission.
LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 29.
441.
VELCO has also employed the use of phase shifting transformers (“PSTs”) for
decades to defer the construction of added transmission (the Plattsburg Phase Angle Regulating
Transformer (“PAR”), the Sandbar PAR, the Blissville and Granite PSTs) for power flow
control. Id.
442.
VELCO also has decades worth of experience with the Highgate HVDC terminal,
and has installed and is operating numerous synchronous condensers on its system. VELCO has
implemented electronic and digital relays and recording devices on the transmission system
which provide fast and reliable communications in fault sensing and the necessary signals to
- 75 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 76 of 162
fault interrupting devices (i.e. breakers). The existing relaying and fault interrupting
infrastructure on the Vermont Yankee-to-Coolidge 345 kV line can remove the faulted line in no
more than 67 milliseconds. Response times for modern FACTs devices are not much better,
often ranging in the 15 to 50 millisecond range. Even if the existing Vermont Yankee to
Coolidge 345 kV line could be interrupted instantaneously, this would do nothing to address the
underlying reliability problem, nor the associated equipment at risk. Id. at 29-30.
443.
With respect to FACTS technology, Mr. Yeager has offered no specifics as to the
location, size, type or cost of the devices that he proposes. In fact, the Petitioners and DPS have
considered employing such a device at Coolidge as one of the project alternatives, but they
concluded that the device was wholly inadequate as a long-term remedy. The sudden loss of real
power or MW’s simply can’t be made up by providing reactive compensation or voltage support.
Smith reb. pf. at 3-4.
444.
We find that integrated, smart sensors and communications technology, while
beneficial for other reasons, will not enhance the system’s ability to carry large magnitudes of
current. Moreover, VELCO has already installed a fiber-optic communications network along its
transmission footprint, which is used to gather information on system conditions, display that
information on SCADA system in its control center for assessment and control purposes, and
coordinate its digital relaying responses to fault events. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 30.
445.
We also find that Mr. Yeager is wrong that sensors and real-time monitoring will
allow the system to correct itself for and anticipate potential instabilities. While redirection of
flows post-contingency is possible, there is simply not enough capacity in the remaining ties to
make up the 500 MW loss. Moreover, practical application of the software required to achieve
centralized computer-based control requires at least 5 to 10 years of further research and
development. Smith reb. pf. at 5.
446.
With respect to Mr. Yeager’s recommendation to install AMI, we find that
although the use of demand-side price signals as a tool for managing peak load has promise, its
impact on transmission reliability will need significant analysis and review to determine its
effectiveness after implementation within Vermont. AMI efforts are underway in Vermont, but
- 76 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 77 of 162
deployment may be many years away. As such, it is not a solution to the reliability issues
addressed by the Southern Loop Project. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 31.
447.
As to Mr. Yeager’s recommendation to integrate distributed energy resources, we
find that the costs, societal adjustment and implementation lag-time make this proposal (similar
to AMI) inappropriate for consideration as a solution to the immediate reliability concerns for the
loss of the 340 line or loss of the Vermont Yankee T4 transformer. Id. at 32.
448.
Ultimately, we find Mr. Yeager’s broad and unsubstantiated recommendations to
be wholly insufficient to solve the n-1-1 contingency involving the loss of the existing 345 kV
Vernon-to-Cavendish line that the Southern Loop Project is designed to address. See
LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 27; see also Smith reb. pf. at 7. 18
DISCUSSION
As this Board observed in its order approving VELCO’s Northwest Vermont Reliability
Project (“NRP”): “Vermont needs a bulk transmission system that very rarely fails, because our
society has become increasingly dependent on the electric grid.” In re: Northwest Vt.
Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 8. Further, as an owner and operator of
bulk power transmission facilities, VELCO has an obligation under Section 215 of the Federal
Power Act19 and newly enacted national Reliability Standards,20 to plan and implement system
upgrades that are robust enough to be able to withstand a range of contingencies while reliably
serving customer demand and preventing identified outages, and flexible enough to
18 While the evidence shows that Mr. Yeager’s recommendations cannot avoid or defer the need for the Project, it is
important to recognize that Vermont utilities, including CVPS, are currently pursuing the introduction of smart grid
and AMI technologies. Jones/Kirby reb. pf. at 7-8; see also Investigation into Vermont Electric Utilities' Use of
Smart Metering and Time-Based Rates, Docket No. 7307, Order of 4/18/07.
19 16 U.S.C § 824o.
20 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, FERC Order No. 693, 72 Fed. Reg. 16,416 (April 4,
2007), order on reh’g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ¶ 61, 053 (2007).
- 77 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 78 of 162
accommodate a broad range of system conditions over a planning horizon that takes into account
lead times to place facilities in service.21
The regional need for this Project was identified in the Critical Load Study prepared by
VELCO for the NRP, in which VELCO reported that an outage of the Plattsburgh-Vermont 115
kV transmission tie (“PV-20”), with loss of the Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line, would result in
voltage collapse at a 1165 MW load level (with NRP upgrades in service). It was also identified
in the VELCO 2006 Long Range Transmission Plan Analysis as the most significant problem on
the system. As a result, VELCO and the other signatories to the Docket No. 7081 MOU
identified the Southern Loop Project as part of the transition plan set forth in the MOU.
Since
the approval of the last large transmission upgrade (the NRP approved in January 2005),
Vermont’s and New England’s summer peak loads continue to grow while regional reliability
standards become better defined and monitored (with mandatory compliance with NERC and
NPCC planning standards).
The Southern Loop Project will fix both the local and regional system deficiencies, and
will bring VELCO into compliance with the new federal Reliability Standards, as well as similar
regional Reliability Standards that apply to the bulk power system. With the completion of a
second Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line, loss of one 345 kV line in the corridor still leaves the
other to perform the necessary network function for this transmission system function. Second,
the Project will result in a new substation in Vernon, just north of the Vermont Yankee
substation, which will address breaker failure contingencies by removing key elements of the
local power system from adjacent breaker positions within the new Vernon substation. Finally, a
second 345/115 kV autotransformer will be installed in this new substation, removing the local
load reliability susceptibility for loss of the sole Vermont Yankee 345/115 kV autotransformer.
The Project addresses the local CVPS reliability problem in southern Vermont by
including a new injection point (Vernon-to-Newfane portion of the Coolidge Connector 345 kV
line, new Newfane 345/115/46 kV substation and one-mile 345 kV loop line between the
Newfane substation and the new Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line).
21 Id. at ¶ 1683.
- 78 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 79 of 162
We also find that the Project is the most cost-effective solution. As compared to the
alternatives studied, including alternatives with more aggressive energy efficiency and new
generation in Vermont, the Coolidge Connector component of the Southern Loop Project has the
lowest capital costs to Vermont, and also yields the lowest average retail rates. While the
societal costs of an energy efficiency scenario may be lower over the life of the Coolidge
Connector, our determination of cost-effectiveness is not limited to one parameter. As we
clarified in our order in Investigation Into Least-Cost Integrated Resource Planning for Vermont
Electric Power Company Inc.’s Transmission System, Docket No. 7081, Order of 6/20/07, the
relative rate and bill impacts of the alternatives, the financial feasibility of each alternative, the
ability of each alternative to be implemented in a timely manner to address the reliability
deficiency, and relative economic benefits to the state, are all economic considerations that we
must evaluate.22
The achievable energy efficiency scenario studied would call for utility expenditure of at
least $594 million over the next ten years, substantially more than currently budgeted for
Efficiency Vermont.23 This requires a substantial, long-term increase in state-wide energy
efficiency budgets. In addition, as Optimal Energy noted in its analysis of potential energy
efficiency resources for this Project: “An important source of uncertainty, however, is the fact
that no utility has ever sustained such large distributed resource commitments for so long in so
many markets simultaneously and actually achieved the relative magnitudes of peak demand
savings projected over the next decade … .”24 Moreover, in order to meet minimum reliability
criteria for the Coolidge Connector, an energy efficiency solution would need to be
supplemented with additional generation.
It should be recognized that the Project does incorporate plans for energy efficiency and
customer-sited distributed generation in order to defer a potential 115 kV Project component in
Southern Vermont. However, the remainder of the Project cannot be deferred by non22 Investigation Into Least-Cost Integrated Resource Planning for Vermont Electric Power Company Inc.’s
Transmission System, Docket No. 7081, Order of 6/20/07 at 21-22
23 Exhibit Petitioners RSH-2, Table 5.
24 Kleinman pf. at 8.
- 79 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 80 of 162
transmission alternatives, and is the most cost-effective solution among potentially available
transmission alternatives to solve the severe reliability exposures faced by both the regional and
local system networks. We note that on the regional level, this Project need is driven by load and
system topology not only in Vermont, but extending into New York, New Hampshire and New
England as well. A regional solution, as proposed by Petitioners and supported by ISO-NE, and
one whose costs are shared by the region, is an appropriate and cost-effective solution to these
regional issues.
In addition to improving the reliability of the Vermont transmission system, the stronger,
more stable transmission system resulting from the Project will provide a more robust framework
with regard to generation in Vermont, as well as providing this area access to generation from
elsewhere in Vermont and New England. This will reduce congestion that results from
operational reliability constraints and improved efficiency with reduced system losses. The
added transmission strength afforded by the Project will result in added stability and power
quality benefits, particularly through redundancy of the added 345 kV line from Vernon to
Coolidge.25
System Stability and Reliability [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(3)]
449.
The Project will not adversely affect system stability and reliability; in fact, the
Project will enhance system stability and reliability. This finding is supported by findings 330
through 345, above, and findings 450 through 460, below.
450.
If substantial system reinforcements are not provided, reliability criteria will not
be met and the Vermont and regional transmission systems will be vulnerable to voltage sags,
thermal overloads, loss of customer load, and possibly widespread voltage collapse. Smith pf.
at 4.
451.
Not only would these system conditions and failures violate regional and national
reliability criteria, they potentially subject VELCO to large fines. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb.
pf. at 3.
25 Smith pf. at 19-20.
- 80 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 81 of 162
452.
In addition to the regional problems, electrical facilities in southern Vermont in
Bennington and Windham counties owned by CVPS have limited ability to support increased
electrical demand and are unable to withstand failures of, or to have preventive maintenance
conducted on, key components at present demand levels. LaForest pf. at 10.
453.
The essential purpose of the subtransmission elements of the Project is to improve
system stability and reliability. The CVPS Southern Loop subtransmission system and
Brattleboro area system have an existing exposure to unreliable operation that is unacceptable.
Jones/Kirby pf. at 27-28.
454.
In addition to improving the reliability of the Vermont transmission system, the
stronger, more stable transmission system resulting from the project will provide a more robust
framework with regard to generation in Vermont, as well as providing this area access to
generation from elsewhere in Vermont and New England. This will reduce congestion that
results from operational reliability constraints. Smith pf. at 20.
455.
The added transmission strength afforded by the Project will result in added
stability and power quality benefits, particularly through redundancy of the added 345 kV line
from Vernon to Coolidge. Id.
456.
The presence of a second line substantially reduces the shock to the system
caused by electrical faults on either line and subsequent loss of that line. The presence of the
second line from Vernon to Coolidge will also provide additional operational flexibility and
provide enhanced windows of opportunity to perform system maintenance. Id.
457.
Stability of the system with addition of the Project will be enhanced in several
ways. First, voltage stability will be improved due to the added stiffness provided by the 345 kV
line addition from Vernon to Coolidge. Id. at 28-29.
458.
Angular stability of interconnected Vermont generators will be enhanced by the
added stiffness afforded by the 345 kV addition. Id. at 29.
459.
The added voltage stability noted above will also reduce reactive demands on this
generation during contingency conditions, thereby reducing the chances of their tripping during
severe contingencies. Id.
- 81 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 82 of 162
460.
In addition, the added stiffness will provide enhanced power quality for Vermont
customers connected to the system. The NEPOOL Reliability Committee has determined that
the proposed Project will have no adverse impact on regional system reliability or stability. 26 Id.
Economic Benefit to the State [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(4)]
461.
The Project will result in economic and social benefits to the state of Vermont and
its residents. This finding is supported by findings 462 through 484, below.
462.
The Southern Loop Project is needed to correct system deficiencies that expose
Vermont, as well as portions of New York and New Hampshire, to transmission system failures
with consequent widespread blackouts. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 3.
463.
Not only would these system conditions and failures violate regional and national
bulk system reliability criteria and potentially subject VELCO to large fines, they could have
severe adverse economic consequences for Vermont and neighboring states impacted by such
failures. Id.
464.
Improved reliability in the bulk power system in Vermont increases public safety
and convenience while simultaneously reducing Vermont’s exposure to outages which could
potentially have large economic impacts on Vermont. See In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability
Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 181; LaForest pf. at 9-10; LaForest/Diebold/Hahn
reb. pf. at 3-4.
465.
Power reliability and power quality can have significant impacts to businesses,
particularly as we shift to a digital society. LaForest/Diebold/Hahn reb. pf. at 4.
466.
Some appliances will not run below a specified voltage level, and prolonged
operation at reduced voltage can prematurely age or damage an appliance. High voltage may
damage equipment, such as computers, light bulbs, and televisions. Large voltage changes, a
phenomenon that occurs on weaker transmission systems, can be noticeable to individuals and
26
Documented in a memo from the Secretary of the NEPOOL Reliability Committee to the NEPOOL Participants
Committee, titled “Actions of the Reliability Committee,” dated May 22, 2008.
- 82 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 83 of 162
especially to sensitive equipment, such as computers and certain manufacturing machinery. Id.
at 17-18.
467.
These voltage changes are not just a nuisance; they can affect manufacturing
processes and result in significant financial loss. The impact of even momentary power
disturbances can be quite severe in technology manufacturing facilities, like IBM’s. Poor
voltage performance can result in significant production and financial losses. LaForest/Diebold
pf. at 18; see Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-17 (testimony of Robert G. Lang to the Vermont
House Commerce Committee, October 29, 2003).
468.
The 2003 Blackout, while it did not cause IBM’s semiconductor manufacturing
business operations in Vermont to “go off the grid,” the low voltages caused numerous systems
and equipment to shut off. Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-7 at 1.
469.
The result was that IBM lost a full day of production, was forced to scrap
hundreds of partially completed wafers which were damaged, thousands of wafers required
repair, and approximately $500,000 in spare parts were required to re-start and re-qualify the
systems. Total losses from this single event were in the millions of dollars. Id.
470.
The reliability of electric power, and the quality of electrical power are very
important to technology manufacturers like IBM. Id. at 2.
471.
It is of utmost importance that adequate amounts of reliable power be available to
support the continuous round the clock operations of IBM’s manufacturing facilities. Id.
472.
Re-start and re-qualification of IBM’s semiconductor manufacturing equipment
and support systems can take many hours, or even days, in the event of a loss of power. Id.
473.
The semiconductor industry is a very competitive industry, and IBM is constantly
seeking ways to reduce operating costs. Power outages and disturbances can create a significant
financial burden on IBM’s semiconductor manufacturing operations in Vermont. Id. at 3.
474.
As more and more businesses and homes make more use of sensitive electric
equipment, the need for high levels of reliability and power quality will increase. Id.
475.
EPRI studies have reported that across all business sectors, the U.S. economy is
losing between $104 billion and $164 billion a year due to outages, and even a one-second power
- 83 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 84 of 162
disruption can cost some firms in the thousands of dollars. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners Reb. LDH-1,
at ES-3.
476.
Based upon industry information and analyses contained in a report, Cost of
Power Interruptions to Electricity Consumers in the United States (U.S.), published by the Ernest
Orlando Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory published in February of 2006, the potential cost
of a three hour outage of the 340 line (the single worst outage that would be resolved by the
Project) would be approximately $254 million (in 2008 dollars). See Exhibit Stipulation 5 at
para. 8 and attachments.27
477.
The CVPS Southern Loop subtransmission system and Brattleboro area system
have an existing exposure to unreliable operation that is unacceptable. Jones/Kirby pf. at 28.
478.
Many of the customers in this area are businesses that depend on reliable service
for continued profitability and employment. By remediating this undue exposure to reliability
problems, the Project would help to maintain this vital commerce and even support its expansion.
Such improvement represents a tangible economic benefit to the state and its residents. Id.
479.
The CVPS subtransmission elements of the Project were advanced to promote
electric system safety, security, adequacy, reliability, efficiency, sustainability, adaptability,
robustness and affordability principles. Id. at 28 - 36.
480.
Improved reliability in the bulk power system is important to attracting and
retaining businesses and supporting a healthy business climate in Vermont. In re: Northwest Vt.
Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 181.
481.
Reliable power supply and competitively-priced electricity are critical to
manufacturing companies, like IBM, who compete for business in world markets. See id;
Exhibit Petitioners DLL/CD-17 at 3 (testimony of Robert G. Lang to the Vermont House
Commerce Committee, October 29, 2003).
27 Pursuant to the Stipulation between the DPS and Petitioners, the Parties agree that this information and analysis
supports a determination that the Project will result in an economic benefit to the state and its residents and that a
similar analysis of the individual parts of the Project including the Newfane substation is not required. See Exhibit
Stipulation 5 at 4.
- 84 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 85 of 162
482.
As compared to the transmission and non-transmission alternatives studied, the
Southern Loop Project transmission upgrades had significantly lower capital costs and rate
impacts. Hahn pf. at 16; Exhibit Petitioners LaForest Supp. 1.
483.
When regional cost sharing (PTF) is considered, the Project cost to Vermont is
$13 million, as compared to estimates ranging from $500 million to $735 million for the nontransmission alternatives evaluated. Hahn pf. at 16.
484.
The Project elements that have been proposed are based on least-cost planning
principals including the analysis of transmission and non-transmission alternatives. See Exhibit
Petitioners KJ/LK 8; Exhibit Petitioners RSH-2.
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(4), the Board must find that the proposed Project “will
result in an economic benefit to the state and its residents” before issuing a certificate of public
good.
We conclude that the proposed Project will result in an economic benefit to the state and
its residents. It is clear that the status quo presents unacceptable risks of outages in Vermont.
Our findings and conclusions from Docket No. 6860 (the Northwest Vermont Reliability
Project), are on point. There we observed:
The evidence demonstrates that the proposed Project is needed to assure Vermont
that electric power can be reliably provided now and in the near future, up to load
levels of approximately 1,200 MW. The proposed Project would thus reduce the
possibility of potentially serious economic consequences caused by wide-spread
loss of power in northwest Vermont (which could cascade to wider areas of the
state, as well). Such economic consequences would include, but are not limited
to, the cost of lost production at manufacturing facilities and other energydependent businesses. A more reliable bulk power system could enhance
businesses’ perceptions of Vermont as a place to locate or expand existing
facilities. If businesses perceive Vermont’s infrastructure to be more reliable than
other states in the Northeast, Vermont will be at a competitive advantage in
attracting new businesses to Vermont or convincing existing companies to expand
here. Conversely, if businesses perceive the infrastructure to be less reliable than
other states as a result of doing nothing to address current signs of deficiencies,
then Vermont could be at a serious competitive disadvantage.
- 85 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 86 of 162
In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 183.
In this case, the evidence demonstrates that existing system deficiencies expose 1000
MW of Vermont load, representing nearly the entire state, as well as significant portions of New
Hampshire and New York load, to potential voltage collapse and cascading outages, at load
levels below existing summer peak loads. That is, the timing, scope and potential severity of the
reliability problems presented in this case are even more severe than those presented in Docket
No. 6860. Our rationale and conclusions apply equally, if not with more force, here.
We also affirm that quantifying the economic costs of inaction, which would be
significant, is not necessary to reach this conclusion. As we observed in Docket No. 6860:
Some considerations do not readily lend themselves to an easily quantifiable cost
analysis. Furthermore, there is no requirement under the statute limiting our
analysis [under Section 248(b)(4)] strictly to those economic benefits that are
readily quantifiable. Doing nothing to address reliability in a system that is
already experiencing deficiencies is neither sound regulatory policy, nor likely to
lead to anything but negative economic consequences.
Id. at 184.
We find that the proposed Southern Loop Project provides an economic benefit to the
residents of the state of Vermont.
Aesthetics, Historic Sites and Water Purity, the Natural Environment and Public
Health and Safety [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(5)]
485.
The Project will not have an undue adverse effect on aesthetics, historic sites and
water purity, the natural environment, and the public health and safety. This finding is supported
by findings 486 through 855, below, which give due consideration to the criteria specified in 10
V.S.A. §§ 1424a(d) and 6086(a)(1) through (8) and (9)(K).
- 86 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 87 of 162
Outstanding Resource Waters
[10 V.S.A. § 1424a(d) and 30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(8)]
486.
No element of the Project crosses or affects water bodies designated by the
Vermont Water Resources Board as Outstanding Resource Waters, and therefore the Project will
not have any impact on Outstanding Resource Waters. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 6.
Air Pollution
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)]
487.
The Project will not cause undue air pollution. This finding is supported by
findings 488 through 498, below.
488.
During construction, there will be minimal, short-term impacts from construction
equipment (e.g., diesel and gasoline-powered trucks and equipment). Stamatov pf. at 11.
489.
For tree clearing, trees/brush will be chipped – not burned. Id; Disorda pf. at 25.
490.
Dust control, when necessary, will be accomplished through application of water
or calcium chloride on construction access roads and other areas disturbed by construction.
Stamatov pf. at 11.
491.
Post-construction, there will be no air emissions from the ongoing operation of
the Project. Id.
492.
CVPS will not be using SF6 containing circuit breakers. Rather, it will use new
vacuum breakers similar to the ones being installed at the company’s Kendall Farm substation
and synchronous condenser installation. Tr. 11/06/08 at 91 (Johnson).
493.
Vacuum breakers are currently not an option at the 115 kV and 345 kV voltage
levels. Id. at 85 (Barrett).
494.
While at least one vendor is working towards developing a higher voltage vacuum
technology, even if it were to become available, there is a danger in being the first to use new
technology, particularly for system facilities as critical as these. See id. at 86-87 (Barrett).
495.
The breakers do not actually emit any gas when they are operating, and
maintenance is performed with a gas cart, which is used for venting and containing any gas
emissions. Id. at 87-88 (Predom).
- 87 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 88 of 162
496.
The breakers are armed to detect any low pressure. However, low pressure may
not necessarily mean that a gas leak has occurred. It may also result from temperature changes.
Id. at 88 (Barrett); Id. at 96-97 (Johnson).
497.
While VELCO and CVPS acknowledged that breaker low pressure alarms had
been detected, neither Mr. Johnson nor Mr. Predom were aware of any leaks on VELCO
equipment. Id. at 88 (Predom); Id. at 95 (Johnson).
498.
The manufacturers guarantee less than a one percent gas loss per year, so the risk
of leaks is very low. Id. at 96 (Johnson).
Noise
499.
The Project will not produce undue noise levels. This finding is supported by
findings 500 through 506, below.
500.
Any noise resulting from Project construction will result primarily from operation
of construction equipment. Stamatov pf. at 11.
501.
There are no federal or state noise standards that apply to the Project. Kaliski pf.
502.
The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Community Noise” suggests
at 4.
noise criteria based on the most recent scientific research on noise effects. The Guidelines,
published in 1999, recommend a limit of 50 dBA, averaged over the day to protect against
moderate annoyance, and 45 dBA, averaged over the night to protect against sleep disturbance.
Id. at 4-5; see also In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at
143.
503.
In its decision in Re: Hannaford Brothers Co. and Southgate Enterprises, Inc.
#4C0238-5-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law & Order (altered) 11/27/02), the
Environmental Board imposed noise limits of 60 dBA during the day and 50 dBA during the
night for residences of the quieter Queen City neighborhood behind the store. Kaliski pf. at 5.
504.
In addition, the National Electrical Manufacturer’s Association (“NEMA”)
publishes standards for noise emissions from new power transformers. These are codified in
- 88 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 89 of 162
NEMA Standards Publication No. TR-1-1993 (R2000), Transformers, Regulators, and Reactors.
The standards give maximum noise levels at a distance of 1 to 6 feet from a transformer under
various cooling modes by transformer size. Id. at 6.
505.
The noise that will be produced by the Project substations is expected to be below
the standards described above. See id. at 6-10; Exhibit Petitioners KK-3.
506.
The primary component of noise emitted from transmission lines is “corona
noise.” However, corona noise typically only creates public concern with line voltages at and
above 500 kV. Kaliski pf. at 11.
DISCUSSION
The models prepared by the Petitioners indicate that the noise levels at the substations
will not exceed any of the guidelines discussed above. Based upon this evidence, we find that
the noise levels from the proposed Project upgrades will not be unduly adverse.
Water Pollution
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)]
507.
The Project will not cause undue water pollution. This finding is supported by
findings 508 through 553, below.
Headwaters
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(A)]
508.
The Project will meet all applicable health and environmental conservation
regulations regarding reduction of the quality of the ground or surface waters flowing through or
upon headwaters areas. This finding is supported by findings 509 through 513, below.
509.
There are no headwater resources located at any of the Project substations.
Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 8.
510.
Most of the identified headwaters within the Southern Loop Project study area are
first-order streams with relatively low flow regimes. Id. at 7 and Figure 2.
- 89 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 90 of 162
511.
The Project activities that have the potential to affect headwater streams include
tree clearing, and the limited ground disturbance associated with the construction of transmission
pole structures, access roads, and the installation of conductors. Id. at 8.
512.
The Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV ROW crosses only one known tributary
(Stickney Brook) that contributes to water supply along the entire Project ROW. Stickney Brook
is withdrawn for supply to Pleasant Valley Reservoir in Brattleboro. Due to access constraints,
the crossing of Stickney Brook is necessary to construct the line. This crossing will be
temporary in nature and will be performed with the use of a temporary bridge. See id.
513.
The potential effects of the Project upon ground and surface water quality on
lands that may be considered headwaters will not be significant. With the implementation of the
practices and standards outlined in VELCO’s Stream Crossing Plan, its Transmission Vegetation
Management Plan, its Environmental Guidance Manual and a project-specific EPSC plan, the
Southern Loop Project will have minimal potential to adversely affect the natural flow regime,
the condition or water quality of headwater streams, or public health. Id. at 8-9.
Waste Disposal
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(B)]
514.
The Project will meet the applicable health and environmental Vermont
Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”) regulations for waste disposal. It will not
involve the injection of waste materials or any harmful toxic substances into groundwater or
wells. Stamatov pf at 12; see also findings 515 through 518, below.
515.
To minimize the possibility of a mineral oil release from power transformers to
the underlying soil and/or groundwater, each new substation transformer will be designed in
accordance with ANSI/IEEE Standard 980, IEEE Guide for Containment and Control of Oil
Spills in Substations. Stamatov pf. at 12; see In re: East Avenue Loop Project, Docket No. 7314,
Order of 5/29/08 at 48.
516.
The generation of construction debris will be minimal. All construction debris
will be disposed of at an approved construction and demolition debris landfill. Stamatov pf. at
12.
- 90 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 91 of 162
517.
At the Vernon substation, a septic tank/leach field system will be constructed to
handle sanitary wastewater from the toilet and sink to be located within the control building.
The substation toilet facilities are used infrequently, primarily by maintenance personnel, as the
substations are not manned. Id. at 13.
518.
The toilet facility will be constructed in accordance with the applicable
Department of Environmental Conservation regulations, and VELCO will obtain a water supply,
wastewater disposal permit from DEC prior to construction of the toilet facility. Id.
Water Conservation
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(C)]
519.
The Project has considered water conservation, incorporates multiple use of
recycling where technically and economically practical, utilizes the best available technology for
such applications, and provides for continued efficient operation of these systems. This finding
is supported by findings 520 through 521, below.
520.
Presently, water consumption at the Coolidge substation is insignificant, as the
only water-consuming fixtures include a toilet, sink, and an emergency eye wash/shower device.
No changes with respect to these fixtures are planned at this facility. Stamatov pf. at 13.
521.
A water supply well is planned for the Vernon substation; however, the water use
anticipated for this facility (e.g., toilet, sink, eye-wash station) will be infrequent and minimal.
No water-consuming fixtures are planned for the Newfane substation. Id. at 13.
Floodways
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(D)]
522.
The Project will not restrict or divert the flow of floodwaters or increase the peak
discharge of the streams and endanger the health, safety, and welfare of the public or of riparian
owners during flooding. This finding is supported by findings 523 through 524, below.
523.
The Project ROW crosses only seven Federal Emergency Management Agency
(“FEMA”) Flood Insurance Rate Map (“FIRM”) 100-year floodways and floodway fringes
(collectively referred to as special flood hazard areas (“SFHA”)). These are located at the Broad
- 91 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 92 of 162
Brook (Guilford), the West River, (Dummerston), Saxtons River (Windham), South Branch
(Windham), Middle Branch/Williams River (Andover), Williams River (Chester) and the Black
River (Cavendish). Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 9, 10.
524.
None of the Project substations are located within SFHA, and none of the
proposed structures for the Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line or the Newfane Loop are within a
SFHA. Id. at 10.
Streams and Shorelines
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a) (1) (E) & (F)]
525.
The Project will maintain the natural condition of involved streams and will not
endanger the health, safety, or welfare of the public or adjoining landowners. The Project will,
insofar as possible, retain all shorelines and waters in their natural condition, allow continued
access to the waters and the recreational opportunities provided by the waters, retain or provide
vegetation which will screen the Project from the waters, and stabilize the bank from erosion, as
necessary, with vegetation cover. This finding is supported by findings 526 through 537, below.
Streams
526.
There are multiple named second and third order streams and brooks within the
Project ROWs, and numerous small, mostly first-order unnamed tributaries with defined flow
(seasonal and perennial), many which border wetlands that are at the top of the drainage of these
tributaries along the Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV ROW. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 12.
527.
The Newfane Loop ROW crosses the West River and two small first-order
tributary streams. Id.
528.
Construction activity that could affect stream resources includes tree clearing, and
the ground disturbance associated with the construction of transmission pole structures, access
roads and the installation of conductors. Id.
529.
VELCO has designed the project to locate new pole structures as far from stream
banks as feasible to maintain appropriate stream riparian buffers, and particularly for those
associated with Class Two wetlands. Id.
- 92 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 93 of 162
530.
VELCO has submitted design revisions which reflect shifts in Structures 282 and
283 to avoid stream impacts. Exhibit Petitioners Supplemental RR-1 at 2.
531.
Where new pole structures are to be located within a stream buffer, construction
impacts will be temporary and mitigated with appropriate erosion control and site restoration
practices. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 13.
532.
Where stream crossing avoidance is not feasible, VELCO will utilize stream
crossing methodologies and best management practices outlined in the Stream Crossing Plan
previously submitted to the ANR and Public Service Board under prior proceedings.
Additionally, several permanent culverts will be installed to facilitate construction as well as
future maintenance activities and emergency repairs. All work will be performed in compliance
with applicable state and federal permits. See id.
533.
VELCO’s Transmission Vegetation Management Plan incorporates vegetation
management practices designed to protect streams, stream buffers and shoreline resources. See
Exhibit Petitioners JD-2 at 7; Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 14.
Shorelines
534.
The Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV ROW does not cross any lakes, and crosses
only one pond. This pond is an unnamed pond/wetland complex on a first-order tributary to Mill
Brook, and is impounded by a beaver dam. Id. at 16 and Figure 2, sheet 6.
535.
The Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV ROW crosses three applicable rivers with
shoreline resources: the West River, Saxton River and Black River. Id. at 16
536.
The Newfane Loop ROW also crosses the West River east of the substation. Id.
537.
There is no necessity to locate, nor are there any components (e.g., substations,
transmission structures, access roads, laydown area) of the Project, located within shoreline
boundaries. Id. at 17.
Wetlands
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(G)]
538.
The Project will not violate the rules of the Water Resources Board relating to
significant wetlands. This finding is supported by findings 539 through 553, below.
- 93 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 94 of 162
539.
The Vermont Wetland Rules (“VWR”) protect “Class One” and “Class Two”
wetlands as “significant” wetlands. See Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 17; see also
Damiano/Connaughton/Stamatov reb. pf. at 3.
540.
There are no Class One wetlands impacted by the Project.
Damiano/Connaughton/Stamatov reb. pf. at 3.
541.
VELCO filed a Project CUD application with the ANR on May 13, 2008. Id. at 4.
542.
The CUD application identified 24 wetlands within the Project area as Class Two.
543.
As part of the CUD application review process, VELCO and ANR personnel
See id.
conducted field inspections of the wetlands delineated on the Project Plans, and based on this
collaborative field verification, ANR subsequently determined that that 11 wetlands previously
identified by VELCO as Class Two are in fact Class Three wetlands. Id.
544.
Therefore, within the entire 51-mile Southern Loop Project corridor, only 13 of
the wetlands identified in the Natural Resource Assessment Report are now considered to be
Class Two and subject to regulation under the VWR. Id.; Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 1.
545.
No wetlands were identified at the Vernon or Cavendish substations, and two
small Class Three wetlands were identified at the Newfane substation. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2
at 20 and Table 9-1.
546.
Petitioners have agreed to undertake certain mitigation and avoidance measures
such that the Project will not create an undue adverse impact upon the functions and values of
Class Two wetlands. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 1.
547.
The Project as proposed will avoid or minimize impacts to Class Two wetlands by
(1) avoiding pole placement in wetlands to the extent practicable, (2) use and restoration of
existing access routes where practicable, and (3) implementation of best management practices
(“BMPs”) consistent with VELCO’s Environmental Guidance Manual. The BMPs included in
VELCO’s Environmental Guidance Manual are well designed to avoid and minimize impacts to
the functions and values of significant wetlands. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 1-2; see also
Damiano/Connaughton/Stamatov reb. pf. at 5; see also Metz pf. at 6-7.
- 94 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 95 of 162
548.
VELCO’s BMPs for conducting construction work in wetlands include: (1) if
feasible, use of existing access routes; (2) if feasible, conduct work under winter or dry
conditions; (3) when winter or dry conditions are not present or do not persist for a sufficient
work period, conduct work using construction mats or other authorized temporary fills; or (4)
access with the use of permanent fills in accordance with permit authorizations. Exhibit
Stipulation 1 at 2; Damiano/Connaughton/Stamatov reb. pf. at 6; see Metz pf. at 7.
549.
The Petitioners and ANR agree that construction activities should not be restricted
to the winter months only. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 2.
550.
In response to a recommendation of Mr. Metz, VELCO relocated Structure 115
80 feet north to avoid impacts to wetlands. McNamara/Buscher/Jones/Kirby reb. pf. at 18;
Exhibit Petitioners Supplemental RR-1 at 2; see Metz pf. at 7.
551.
VELCO also revised structure locations for Structures 35, 150 and 389 in an
effort to minimize wetland impacts. See Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-1 at 2.
552.
To address third-party ATV use in the corridor that may impact wetlands,
Petitioners agree to send letters to relevant landowners, and engage in general training and
presentations to local ATV groups. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 2.
553.
The Petitioners and ANR agree that there should be no restriction with respect to
clearing that would violate or otherwise be inconsistent with NERC reliability standards for
vegetation management. Id. at 2.
DISCUSSION
Under Section 248, and the incorporated Act 250 criteria, the Board must give “due
consideration” to Act 250 Criterion 1G, which specifies that a proposed project “will not violate”
the VWR. 30 V.S.A. §248(b)(5); 10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(G). Act 250 Criterion 1(G) states: “[a]
permit will be granted whenever it is demonstrated by the applicant, in addition to other criteria,
that the development or subdivision will not violate the rules of the board, as adopted under this
chapter, relating to significant wetlands.” 10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(G).
The VWR establish three classes of wetlands: Class One, Class Two and Class Three.
Under the Rules, only Class One and Class Two wetlands are considered “significant wetlands”
- 95 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 96 of 162
and thus are subject to regulation under the Rules. VWR, Section 1.ii.c; St. Albans Group and
Walmart Stores, Inc. #6F0471-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order (Altered)
6/27/95) at 16 (“The proposed project will not affect any wetlands which are Class One or Class
Two under the Wetland Rules. Those rules state that significant wetlands are those which are
Class One or Two.”). The basis for designation as a Class One or Class Two wetland is the
extent to which the wetland serves one or more of the functions listed in Section 5 of the VWR.
The proposed Project will not impact any Class One wetlands, and will impact only 13
Class Two wetlands. The Petitioners and the Agency of Natural Resources have agreed upon
reasonable mitigation and avoidance measures such that the Project will not create an undue
adverse impact upon the functions and values of Class Two wetlands. Therefore, we conclude
that the Petitioners have satisfied Act 250 Criterion 1G.
Water Supply
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(2) and (a)(3)]
554.
The Project will not burden existing water supplies. This finding is supported by
findings 555 through 557, below.
555.
Presently, water consumption at the Coolidge substation is insignificant, as the
only water-consuming fixtures include a toilet, sink, and an emergency eye wash/shower device.
No changes with respect to these fixtures are planned at this facility. Stamatov pf. at 13.
556.
A water supply well is planned for the Vernon substation; however, the water use
anticipated for this facility (e.g., toilet, sink, eye-wash station) will be infrequent and minimal.
Id.
557.
No water-consuming fixtures are planned for the Newfane substation. Id.
Soil Erosion
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(4)]
558.
The Project will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or reduction of the land to
hold water. This finding is supported by findings 559 through 563, below.
- 96 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 97 of 162
559.
The Project ROWs traverse numerous soil types. These soil types differ in slope,
texture, stoniness, wetness, and degree of potential erosion. Most of the soils are not suitable for
crop farming. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 26.
560.
Reduction of permeable soils from new structure installations will not result in an
unreasonable risk of creating large disturbance areas, interruptions in drainage, or significant
runoff problems that would affect the water quality of streams or wetlands. Id. at 27.
561.
Individual pole structure work sites are typically less than 5,000 square feet and
clearly manageable with appropriate erosion control practices. Id.
562.
For tree clearing, VELCO employs the practices discussed in its Transmission
Vegetation Management Plan, which utilizes as a guide, ANR’s Acceptable Management
Practices for Maintaining Water Quality on Logging Jobs. These measures will adequately
protect against unreasonable soil erosion and are consistent with the site-specific erosion
prevention and sediment control practices that are typically incorporated into VELCO’s EPSC
plans for its transmission projects, and similar EPSC plan measures are incorporated into EPSC
plans for the Southern Loop Project. See id.
563.
The Petitioners have submitted to ANR a site-specific Erosion Prevention and
Sediment Control (“EPSC”) Plan and associated construction permit applications for the
transmission line, Coolidge Substation and Newfane Substation. The construction permit
application associated with the Vernon Substation is currently under development. See Exhibit
Stipulation 1 at 5.
Transportation Systems
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(5)]
564.
The Project will not cause unreasonable congestion or unsafe conditions with
respect to transportation systems. This finding is supported by findings 565 through 568, below.
565.
With respect to Project impacts upon highways, during delivery of large Project
equipment on roadways and during construction of the Project transmission lines at highway and
road crossings, Petitioners will employ the services of traffic control personnel to manage traffic
flow. Stamatov pf. at 14.
- 97 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 98 of 162
566.
Petitioners will obtain all required highway crossing permits. Id.
567.
No public roads will need to be excavated in order to complete this Project. Id.
568.
The new 345 kV Vernon-to-Coolidge transmission line will span railroad
crossings in two locations: one in Vernon just north of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station, and a second in Ludlow, on the south side of Route 103. The line has been designed to
meet applicable clearances at these crossings, and will not have any adverse effect on railway
transportation systems or railway operations. Id.
Educational Services
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(6)]
569.
The Project will have no impact upon educational services provided by local
school systems, other than to enhance the reliability of the electrical service currently provided.
As such, there will be no adverse impact upon educational services. Stamatov pf. at 15.
Municipal Services
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(7)]
570.
The Project will not place an unreasonable burden on the ability of the affected
municipalities to provide municipal services. This finding is supported by finding 571, below.
571.
The Project will not impact municipal or governmental services, other than
requiring some coordination with local law and traffic enforcement services to coordinate the
safe delivery of large equipment or oversized loads to substations, staging areas and the corridor.
This coordination is minor in nature and occurs typically just in advance of equipment/material
deliveries. Stamatov pf. at 15.
Aesthetics
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(8)]
Section 248(b)(5) of Title 30, Vermont Statutes Annotated, requires the Board to make a
finding that a proposed transmission project will not have an undue adverse effect on aesthetics,
- 98 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 99 of 162
with due consideration given to the criteria for aesthetics outlined under the so-called Act 250
statute. Under Act 250 Criterion 8, the burden of proof with respect to demonstrating an undue
adverse impact falls upon the party opposing the project, although the project proponent must
provide sufficient information for the Board to make affirmative findings. In re Chester P. and
Bertha G. Denio, 158 Vt. 230, 236, 608 A.2d 1166, 1170 (1992); 30 V.S.A. 6088(b); see also
Re: Peter S. Tsimortos #2W1127-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 4/13/04)
at 14.
Both the Environmental Board and the Public Service Board utilize the so-called
Quechee Lakes decision (Quechee Lakes Corporation, #3EW0411-EB and #3O439-EB (1986))
to guide the aesthetics analysis. As explained in the Public Service Board’s recent order in
Docket No. 6860, this Board applies the Quechee test in Section 248 proceedings, as follows:
The Public Service Board has adopted the Environmental Board’s
Quechee analysis for guidance in assessing the aesthetic impacts of
proposed projects under Section 248. We have previously
explained the components of the Quechee analysis as follows:
In order to reach a determination as to whether the project will
have an undue adverse effect on the aesthetics of the area, the
Board employs the two-part test first outlined by the Vermont
Environmental Board in Quechee, and further defined in numerous
other decisions.
Pursuant to this procedure, first a determination must be made as to
whether a project will have an adverse impact on aesthetics and the
scenic and natural beauty. In order to find that it will have an
adverse impact, a project must be out of character with its
surroundings. Specific factors used in making this evaluation
include the nature of the project’s surroundings, the compatibility
of the project’s design with those surroundings, the suitability of
the project’s colors and materials with the immediate environment,
the visibility of the project, and the impact of the project on open
space.
The next step in the two-part test, once a conclusion as to the
adverse effect of the project has been reached, is to determine
whether the adverse effect of the project is “undue.” The adverse
- 99 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 100 of 162
effect is considered undue when a positive finding is reached
regarding any one of the following factors:
1. Does the project violate a clear, written community standard
intended to preserve the aesthetics or scenic beauty of the area?
2. Have the applicants failed to take generally available mitigating
steps which a reasonable person would take to improve the
harmony of the project with its surroundings?
3. Does the project offend the sensibilities of the average person?
Is it offensive or shocking because it is out of character with its
surroundings or significantly diminishes the scenic qualities of the
area?
Our analysis, however, does not end with the results of the
Quechee test. Instead, our assessment of whether a particular
project will have an “undue” adverse effect on aesthetics and
scenic or natural beauty is “significantly informed by overall
societal benefits of the project.”
In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 79-80 (footnotes
omitted).
572.
The Project will not have an undue adverse effect on aesthetics or on the scenic or
natural beauty of the area. This finding is supported by findings 573 through 710, below.
General Findings Regarding Aesthetics
573.
When the ROW for the original 345 kV line was obtained in the late 1960’s, the
width of the corridor anticipated the eventual construction of a second line. Exhibit Petitioners
MJB-12 at 12.
574.
This Project benefits from VELCO’s planning foresight in the 1960’s, when the
transmission corridor was first built, to (1) locate the corridor within sparsely populated areas
and through areas which are heavily forested, and (2) acquire sufficient right-of-way to
accommodate future expansion of transmission infrastructure. See id.
575.
The configuration of the new 345 kV will match the existing line to the extent
possible. Wooden H-Frame structures similar to the existing line are being used, and structures
- 100 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 101 of 162
will be located parallel with the existing structures. Structure heights were also assessed to best
coordinate with the existing line. These are all efforts to create uniformity between the existing
and proposed lines, which will ultimately reduce the visual presence of the new line and apparent
change to the landscape. VELCO also plans to use a non-specular material for the new
conductors, which will reduce visibility. Id.
576.
Visibility of the Project is generally limited. Areas from which views are possible
consist largely of roads and surrounding private property situated within rural settings and where
utility poles are a common occurrence. See Buscher pf. at 3-4; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 12.
577.
The potential for adverse and unduly adverse visual impacts were identified by
the Department’s consultant at several locations. See Exhibit DPS-DR-1 at 11-12, 17-19, 24-26.
578.
However, taking into consideration the mitigation proposed and the overall
societal benefits of the Project, we find that the Project’s aesthetic impacts are not undue. See
findings 684-691; In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at
80.
579.
The Petitioners’ aesthetic consultant identified areas of potential adverse impacts
at the following locations:

The Vernon Substation

Fort Bridgman Road (Vernon)

Guilford Center Road (Guilford)

Route 30 and the West River area (Dummerston)

Taft Road (Townshend)

Deer Valley Road (Townsend)

Simpson Brook Road (Townshend)

Simonsville Road, Vermont Route 11 (Andover)

Newfane Loop

Vermont Route 103 (Cavendish)

The Coolidge Substation (Cavendish/Ludlow)
See Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 11.
- 101 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 102 of 162
580.
These were generally the same locations identified by the aesthetics consultant for
the DPS. See Exhibit Stipulation 5; Exhibit Stipulation 5A; Exhibit DPS-DR-1.
581.
The Project does not violate a clear, written community standard intended to
preserve the aesthetics, or scenic beauty, of the area through which the Southern Loop Project is
located. In fact, the utilization of existing transmission corridors is encouraged within many of
the town plans for the communities in which the corridor exists. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at
12.
582.
The applicants have taken generally available mitigating steps to improve the
harmony of the Project with its surroundings. Reasonable mitigation has been proposed
throughout the Project, in structure design and also with the use of mitigation plantings. Id.; see
Exhibit Petitioners MB-4 Revised; see Tr. 11/6/08 at 158-159 (Raphael).
583.
In addition, the Petitioners submitted a number of Project design revisions on
October 3, 2008. Among the changes proposed include the removal or conversion of 40 threepole dead-end structures, most being converted to standard two-pole wood H-frame structures.
This change is beneficial to the visual aesthetics of the Project. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25
at 1.
584.
VELCO will conduct pre-construction field visits to review mitigation plans with
landowners, the Department and other parties as appropriate to field validate the effectiveness of
the mitigation plans proposed and to gain consensus regarding execution of such plans. Exhibit
Stipulation 5 at 6.
585.
VELCO will share these mitigation plans with the Department, who will review
and comment on the plans within 45 days. Id.
586.
The Department reserves the right to review the aesthetic impact after the Project
is constructed. Id.
587.
In the event that following construction, field inspections reveal that the actual
post-construction conditions at certain sites are substantively different from those anticipated
when the mitigation plans were created, the Department may request additional plantings to
- 102 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 103 of 162
ensure effective mitigation. The Petitioners and the Department will work in good faith to reach
agreement on the appropriate mitigation measures. Id.
Fort Bridgman Road/Vernon Substation
588.
The new Vernon substation will be constructed within Entergy’s existing
Vermont Yankee plant fence, in a vacant field just north of the existing VY Plant and substation
yard. Exhibit MJB-2 at 6-7.
589.
In addition to co-locating the substation adjacent to the existing Vermont Yankee
plant and substation, the site is also currently a major transmission line corridor, part of which
contains the existing VELCO Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line. Id. at 7.
590.
The new Vernon substation site will be approximately 9 acres, and will include a
new 345 kV substation, two 345/115 kV power transformers, and a new 115 kV substation.
Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-7 at 1; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 7.
591.
Views of the substation site and lines exiting the substation are most readily
available from Fort Bridgman Road and Governor Hunt Road. The Vernon town offices, library,
and elementary school are located along Governor Hunt Road road. Id. at 105.
592.
Most visible will be the 80-foot tall steel A-Frame structures and the 80-foot tall
static masts for lightening protection. Id.
593.
On October 3, 2008, the Petitioners submitted a revised design for the Vernon
substation, which reflected a 100-foot westward shift in the substation footprint based on more
detailed data obtained through additional access to the Entergy property. Exhibit Petitioners
Supp. RR-25 at 3; Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-7 at 1.
594.
The shift in location of the substation resulted in removal of additional vegetation
along the northern fence of the substation and minor removal of vegetation to the southwest of
the substation. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 3.
595.
As part of the shift in the substation, there is also a need to relocate a parking area
used by Entergy to a location outside of the western hedgerow. Id.
- 103 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 104 of 162
596.
The shift in the substation will result in additional visibility of the substation and
of transmission infrastructure compared to the original conceptual landscape mitigation plans.
Id. at 4.
597.
In response to the increase in visibility, VELCO’s aesthetic consultants T.J. Boyle
Associates prepared alternative mitigation plans which include three berms constructed from
excess material from the substation excavation and a mix of evergreen and deciduous plantings
on each berm. Id.
598.
The two berms along the western edge will also effectively screen the relocated
parking area. See id.
599.
An alternative mitigation plan was prepared in response to review of the plans
with the Millers, an adjacent property owner. As proposed, the northern most berm would be
located north of the substation property on the adjoining property owner’s land, within an
agricultural field currently in use. Id.
600.
The Town of Vernon Selectboard is opposed to mitigation plantings or berming
that would impacts areas in current agricultural use. Exhibit Stipulation 5A at 2.
601.
Due to the limited amount of open agricultural land, T.J. Boyle Associates
prepared an alternate plan that incorporates a north berm within the fence of Vermont Yankee
and eliminates impacts within the agricultural fields. The revised plan incorporates the concerns
of both the Millers and the Town of Vernon. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L1.2;
Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 4; Exhibit Stipulation 5A at 2.
602.
Despite the increase of visibility resulting from the shift in the substation
footprint, proposed improvements are located in an area that already has a significant visual
presence of electrical transmission and generation infrastructure. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR25 at 4.
603.
While upgrades are considered adverse, mitigation efforts to locate the substation
within the fenced area of the Vermont Yankee plant, to retain existing mature vegetation to the
greatest extent possible, and the proposed landscape mitigation berming and plantings, these
adverse impacts cannot be considered undue. Id.; see Exhibit MJB-4 REV, Sheet L1.2.
- 104 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 105 of 162
604.
An aesthetic benefit associated with the new substation construction is the
planned removal of six large 345 kV steel lattice towers. A series of new poles will be needed to
connect the existing lines into the new substation, and also to provide connections between the
new substation and the existing substation. The new 345 kV line will also introduce new
structures into this area. Id. at 105, 107; see Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-6.
605.
The 345 kV transmission line corridor first parallels Fort Bridgman Road to the
east after leaving the Vernon substation. It then angles and crosses Fort Bridgman Road
perpendicular in an east-west direction between structures 8S and 9S and continues to the west.
Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 17.
606.
Views when traveling south towards structure 8-S and 8-SW will be unobstructed
and views traveling north will be increased with the removal of part of the hedgerow that
currently provides screening. As well, further south on Fort Bridgman Road, views of several
structures leaving the Vernon Substation will be visible. Id. at 18.
607.
Within the slightly larger context of the area, there are several large industrial and
commercial businesses that operate along Fort Bridgman Road, including lumber mills, a
concrete plant, and others. The increased infrastructure in views will not significantly alter the
existing character of the landscape. Id.
608.
The Petitioners and the Department will review the mitigation plans for the
Vernon Substation in the field and will conduct field modifications as appropriate. Exhibit
Stipulation 5 at 6.
609.
Reasonably available mitigation efforts that are proposed by Petitioners include
the use of self-weathering steel structures, painting the existing structures a similar color, and the
introduction of mitigation planting to help further soften views. Exhibit MJB-2 at 19.
610.
Plantings will include evergreens to supplement the existing hedgerow south of
the corridor near structure 8-S. This will help provide screening through leaf off conditions. A
mix of deciduous and evergreen plantings are also proposed for the area that will be cleared for
the new line. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L1.3.
- 105 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 106 of 162
Franklin Road/Skyline Drive
611.
The MOU among the Petitioners and the Department recognizes that the
Department has some concerns with respect to aesthetic impacts at this location. See Exhibit
Stipulation 5 at 5.
612.
However, the impacts do not affect public views. VELCO has agreed to work
with the two impacted landowners, and the Department has not suggested any additional
mitigation in this area. See Exhibit Stipulation 5A at 2.
Guilford Center Road
613.
There is a combination of views of the existing corridor from Guilford Center
Road including distant views and close-up views. The most prevailing of these views is when
approaching the corridor from the southwest, from which views to existing structure 26, less the
100 feet off the road, are readily available. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 31.
614.
Other views include more distant views of the corridor entering Weatherhead
Hollow from either ridge and of the crossing itself. Id.
615.
Views of Project upgrades will be possible from several vantage points along
Guilford Center Road; primarily from the same view locations that the existing line can be seen
from. Id.
616.
Views from the northeast begin as the road descends a small hill past an old
farmstead approximately 800 feet from the corridor. Views of upgrades will consist of
additional structures and cleared ROW on hillsides to both sides of the road. However, views of
the clearing and structures on East Mountain will be over 2,400 feet from the closest view point.
Views to East Mountain are also limited to a short duration, a few hundred feet, before they are
blocked by the mature stand of evergreens. Id. at 32.
617.
Views to the northwest are not continuous. Intermittent vegetation along the side
of the road provides a various degree of screening of views as the lines ascend the northern
slopes of the valley. Id.
618.
To the northwest, Structure 27 is setback over 800 feet from the road, which helps
to lessen visual impacts from the new structures. Structure 28 and 29 are even further back in
- 106 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 107 of 162
the views to the northwest of Guilford Center Road. Views of existing and proposed structure 26
will continue to be screened by the existing evergreens and landform (when approaching the
corridor from the northeast). Id.
619.
Project upgrades will be visible from the Weatherhead Hollow Road area.
However, views are broken by irregular clumps of roadside vegetation, and other small stands of
trees within the fields when proceeding along Guilford Center Road. Id.
620.
The Project upgrades at Guilford Center Road will result in adverse impacts.
However, the Project includes reasonable mitigation measures such that the impacts will not be
unduly adverse. Id. at 32-33; see Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L2.1; Exhibit
Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L2.1.
621.
After the Project is constructed and before any plantings are placed in the ground,
the Petitioners and the DPS will review the mitigation plans in the field and conduct field
modifications as appropriate. Id.; Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 6.
West River Road (Vermont Route 30) and the West River, Dummerston
622.
Project upgrades will result in increased visibility of transmission infrastructure
from several locations at the Route 30 and the West River area. Increased views will be possible
from along Route 30 west of the corridor, from the parking area southwest of the crossing, and
from the swimming area and banks of the West River. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 53-55.
623.
When approached from the west, additional clearing within the ROW and the
inclusion of a second 345 kV line will increase views of transmission lines for the mile approach.
Still, vegetation along the west side of the corridor will still exist helping to screen the new line.
The increase in visibility will be much less noticeable during leaf-on conditions. Id. at 55.
624.
As travelers continue closer, approximately 800 feet west of the corridor, views of
existing structure 114 will increase due to clearing for the additional line. Similar, views from
the parking area will have increased visibility of existing structure 114. Id.
625.
VELCO has mitigated impacts associated with this structure by revising its design
plans to set the proposed new structure 114 sixty feet farther back from the road than originally
- 107 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 108 of 162
planned, which will allow the structure much better screening from adjacent vegetation to the
west. Id.
626.
Views from the banks of and from the West River will also be altered. Clearing
for the new line, north of the river, will open views towards the existing structure 115 where
views were not previously available, as well as to the new structure 115. Id.
627.
VELCO has mitigated impacts associated with this structure by revising its design
plans to shift structure 115 eighty (80) feet north, which has the potential to move the structure
further out of view, resulting in an aesthetic improvement. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 2.
628.
The increase in visibility due to Project upgrades and additional transmission
infrastructure will create noticeable changes to the visual character of the area resulting in an
adverse impact at this location. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 54.
629.
However, improvements are still within the context of the existing line; and
mitigation undertaken to relocate the new structure further away from the roadway, in
combination with proposed plantings, will avoid a finding of undue adversity. Id. at 54-55.
630.
Mitigation plantings are proposed south of Route 30 to help soften views to
structure 114. Id. at 55; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 REV, Sheet L4.1.
Hill Road, Brookline
631.
Project upgrades will not result in adverse visual impacts at Hill Road. Exhibit
Petitioners MJB-2 at 67; see also Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 2.
632.
Project upgrades will only create minor increases in visibility and will not
significantly change the visual character of the area. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 67.
633.
The Department has some concerns with respect to aesthetic impacts along Hill
Road, not at the crossing location, but from a location further south looking at the corridor on
Putney Mountain. These views are approximately 1 ½ to 2 miles from the parts of the existing
line that are visible. Exhibit Stipulation 5A at 3.
634.
The Town has expressed similar concerns, but does not wish to install
landscaping that would screen views of the mountain. Id.
- 108 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 109 of 162
635.
There is little ability to screen views of the lines while preserving views of the
mountain. Id.
636.
The Department reserves the opportunity to review post-construction conditions
with the Petitioners to ascertain whether there are any options for mitigation, if so desired. Id.
Taft Road (Crane Mountain), Townshend
637.
At Taft Road, the corridor crosses the road at an angle; views south along the
corridor are accentuated when traveling west, as are views north when traveling east, due to the
angle of the crossing. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 69.
638.
On the far west side of the corridor the roadway curves slightly and runs parallel
within the corridor for about 200 feet. This section of road is currently buffered to the existing
line by a narrow, but mature hedgerow. Id.
639.
Overall, Taft Road stays within the corridor for 700 to 800 feet. Id.
640.
This section of road is currently buffered to the existing line by a narrow, but
mature hedgerow. The existing buffer will need to be removed for the new line. This will result
in increased visibility of the transmission lines when crossing the corridor, as views will
naturally be directed down the corridor. Id.
641.
Views will be created at close range as vehicles will pass only feet from the
proposed structure 164 and views to the south will continue a single span to angle structure 163
where the line shifts more directly south and out of sight. Views to the north will continue
several spans into the distance. It is also likely that the clearing will create some degree of
increased visibility for travelers when approaching the corridor from the west. Id.
642.
The increase in views from clearing for the new line at Taft Road will create a
noticeable change to the visual character of the area. Project upgrades will result in adverse
aesthetic impacts to this area. Id.
643.
The impacts at this location do not rise to the level of unduly adverse, as
vegetation existing within close proximity of the crossing helps to substantially screen views of
transmission infrastructure when approaching the crossing and the Petitioners have proposed
reasonable mitigation to replicate roadside vegetation that is compatible within the ROW and
- 109 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 110 of 162
that will help screen and soften views of the existing and new lines. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners
MJB-4 REV, Sheet L7.1.
644.
Planting locations proposed to mitigate aesthetic impacts in this area are
preliminary and will need to be field located after completion of construction. In addition, some
existing vegetation may be able to be retained. Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 5; Exhibit Stipulation 5A
at 3.
645.
The Petitioners and the Department will review the mitigation plans in the field
and conduct field modifications after the Project is completed but before any plantings are placed
in the ground. Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 6.
Deer Valley Road (southern crossing), Townshend
646.
Deer Valley Road is a Class Three road. The road crosses the corridor in an east-
west direction, at approximately a 45-degree angle, directly adjacent to a sizable wetland. Views
of the corridor are currently well screened until travelers are within the crossing. Exhibit
Petitioners MJB-2 at 74.
647.
There will be adverse impacts at this location, as Project upgrades will increase
views toward transmission infrastructure and will result in a change to the visual character of the
area. Id. at 74-76.
648.
Vegetation removed for the new line will open views when approaching the
corridor from the west and the placement of proposed structure 189 will also be in alignment
with a straight section of road to the west. Id. at 74.
649.
Vegetation removed will increase views towards the southeast along the corridor.
The second line will be clearly visible extending to the distance in these views. Id.
650.
The Petitioners investigated altering the design to move new structure 189 south
of the road to avoid views focused on the structure when traveling from the west, but concluded
this would create more visual impacts by detracting from views across the wetland. Id.
651.
The Petitioners have proposed reasonable mitigation such that the impacts will
not be unduly adverse. Mitigation plantings proposed within the corridor and mature trees that
overhang the road will screen views of structure 189. Plantings along the roadside to the south
- 110 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 111 of 162
will help screen extended views along the corridor. Id. at 74-76; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4
REV, Sheet L7.3.
652.
Petitioners and the Department agree to review the mitigation plans in the field
following construction. Exhibit Stipulation 5A at 3; Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 6.
Simpson Brook Road/Acton Hill, Townshend
653.
Simpson Brook Road and Acton Hill Road come to an intersection within the
VELCO ROW and their alignment focuses views along the corridor. There is little existing
vegetation within the corridor at the intersection of the roads. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 84.
654.
When approaching the crossing, views are well screened due to the dense
vegetation and the slightly meandering alignment of both roads approaching the crossing.
However, views from within the corridor are extended due to navigating the intersection and the
orientation of the roads. Views are limited in either direction to a single span due to intervening
topography. Id.
655.
Clearing to accommodate the new line will remove an existing buffer between
Simpson Brook Road and the corridor. Id.
656.
Existing views will be extended when approaching the corridor from the west and
will have a noticeable increase in the amount of transmission infrastructure. Views when
navigating the intersection will allow focus on new structures both north and south of the
intersection. Id.
657.
There will be adverse impacts at this location. However, these impacts will be
significantly offset by proposed mitigation plantings within the corridor that will soften and
screen views in the area. As a result, the impacts will not be unduly adverse. Id.; Exhibit
Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L7.5.
Route 11/Simonsville Road, Andover
658.
When approaching the corridor at this location, adjacent vegetation and buildings
screen the majority of views. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 91.
- 111 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 112 of 162
659.
Views of existing structure 307 are possible when approaching from the east, for
approximately 500 feet prior to the crossing, due to clearing for a residential property adjacent to
the corridor. Id.
660.
Views across a residential property when approaching the crossing from the west
are also possible, but views of the corridor are currently screened with an existing hedgerow
separating the residence and corridor. Id.
661.
Visibility and the duration of views to the line will increase with the new 345 kV
line due to required clearing. The hedgerow that currently separates the residential property west
of the crossing will need to be removed, creating increased views from the roadway. Id.
662.
However, mitigation plantings are proposed to help screen the increase in
visibility. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L10.1.
663.
The inclusion of mitigation plantings will avoid adverse impacts caused by the
Project, and there will be no undue adverse impacts resulting from Project upgrades. Exhibit
Petitioners MJB-2 at 91.
New Newfane Substation and Newfane Loop
664.
Petitioners have evaluated two alternative locations for a 345/115/46 kV
substation to supply the local 46 kV sub-transmission system. Initially, the companies proposed
to expand the existing CVPS 46 kV West Dummerston substation, located along Vermont Route
30 adjacent to the West River in the Town of Dummerston. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 7.
665.
The Petitioners’ original plans included construction of a new 345/115kV/46kV
substation at this site to provide a source to the local 46 kV system. Following public comments
and additional review, the companies identified an alternate substation site at an abandoned
gravel pit site located off of Route 30 in the Town of Newfane, Vermont. Id.
666.
The proposed Newfane substation will be located on a piece of land between
Route 30 and River Road in the Town of Newfane. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 110.
667.
The site is well screened from outside views from a combination of existing
vegetation and topography. Id. at 110; Exhibit DPS-DR-1 at 24.
- 112 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 113 of 162
668.
We find that the Newfane substation site is a better location for the substation
than the Dummerston site. The substation is well hidden by surrounding topography and
landscaping. Tr. 11/6/08 at 158 (Raphael); Exhibit DPS-DR-1 at 24.
669.
The proposed substation will be located on the eastern side of the site, recessed in
the area previously excavated for gravel extraction. The site is separated from River Road by a
large earthen berm created by the previous excavation on the site, but leaving a large strip of land
adjacent to River Road undisturbed. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 110.
670.
This strip of land is largely vegetated with a mix of evergreen and deciduous
vegetation, with exception to where the existing CVPS 46 kV corridor enters the site. Id.
671.
There will be very minimal views of the proposed substation. Views that are
likely possible are of a new 345 kV structure that will bring lines to the substation from the
Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line. Still, this structure will be located at the back side of the steep
slope that is immediately adjacent to River Road, not within the general viewing area of vehicles
traveling River Road. Id.
672.
The proposed Newfane substation will largely not be visible to the general public
and therefore will not alter the character of the landscape. There will not be adverse impacts
created by the construction of the Newfane substation. Id; see also Exhibit Petitioners Supp.
RR-25 at 5.
673.
The currently proposed Newfane Loop is in response to the relocation of the West
Dummerston substation. Exhibit MJB-2 at 114.
674.
A large portion of reasoning for the currently proposed substation location in
Newfane was in response to public concern regarding potential access routes to the West
Dummerston Substation or the West Dummerston Loop. Id.
675.
If sited in Dummerston, the loop would need to cross Camp Arden Road and the
West River and would not be able to utilize an existing CVPS transmission corridor that
currently contains a 46 kV line as originally conceptualized when beginning the project. The
loop would therefore require new ROW acquisition, at a size wide enough to accommodate two
345 kV transmission lines. Id.
- 113 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 114 of 162
676.
The currently proposed Newfane loop will start from the new Vernon-to-
Cavendish 345 kV transmission line near structure 122 and will proceed west, down a steep
hillside to the West River. The proposal allows the dual 345 kV transmission loop to be sited
alongside the existing CVPS 46 kV line as it heads west of the Vernon-to-Cavendish corridor.
Id. at 114.
677.
There will be eight new structures, east of the West River, including the take-off
structure that will be in line with the Vernon-to-Cavendish line. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners
Supp. RR-5.
678.
The lines will then span from structures 129x-s and 129x-n, east of the river, to
structures 130x-s and 130x-n at the top of the steep hillside west of River Road before entering
the Newfane Substation. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 114.
679.
The Newfane Loop will utilize side-by-side single circuit wood H-frame
structures, leaving the existing CVPS 46 kV line in place to its south. Exhibit Petitioners Supp.
RR-1 at 3.
680.
The final configuration was agreed upon among the Petitioners and the
Department of Public Service due to the ability of the horizontal configuration to eliminate “sky
lighting” of structures because of the reduced structure heights. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25
at 4.
681.
Views of the Newfane Loop are primarily available from River Road, and
particularly for 1,000 feet along the road, south of the corridor. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at
114.
682.
Views across open fields currently allow visibility of the existing CVPS line.
These same views will now include visibility of the 345 kV Newfane Loop. Id. at 114, 116.
683.
Other views of the CVPS 46 kV line also exist north of the corridor along River
Road and from specific locations along Route 30, further to the west. Visibility from Vermont
Route 30 is only for very short durations. Id. at 116.
684.
The Department's aesthetic consultant, Mr Raphael, concluded that the potential
does exist for an unduly adverse impact, but it is acceptable because the benefits of the Project
- 114 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 115 of 162
outweigh any possible aesthetic "costs" from the diminution of the scenic qualities. See Exhibit
DPS-DR-1 at 24-25; Tr. 11/6/06 at 157-159 (Raphael).
685.
Although the Department’s aesthetic expert expressed concern that the aesthetic
impacts of the Newfane Loop in the area of River Road and Route 30 have the potential to be
considered shocking or offensive to the average viewer, Petitioners and the Department explored
different ways to ameliorate this condition to the point of exploring yet another location for the
substation, and none of the alternatives were viable. Tr. 11/6/06 at 157-159 (Raphael).
686.
The location of the Newfane substation and the proposed design of the Newfane
Loop reflect the best case given all of the conditions and considerations. Id.
687.
We find that the proposed Newfane Loop design is the optimal design for this
location based upon aesthetics and costs. Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 5.
688.
The wooden H-Frame configuration is a common element found in the Vermont
landscape and will be compatible with the design of the rest of the Southern Loop Project.
Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 4.
689.
Along River Road, the revisions at the Newfane Loop create a wider clearing west
of the road than previously proposed single pole steel structures. Id. at 5.
690.
Impacts will include the additional clearing, and additional new structures in the
landscape. To help reduce the visual inconsistency of these impacts, landscape mitigation plans
for the Newfane Loop include plantings along the western edge of River Road. Id.
691.
The introduction of a new 345 kV transmission line for the Newfane Loop will
result in a noticeable change to the visual character of the landscape and will result in adverse
impacts in the areas around the proposed loop. However, appropriate mitigation has been
implemented through design of transmission infrastructure and the adverse impacts are not
undue. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 116; see also Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 5; Exhibit
Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L5.1.
- 115 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 116 of 162
Vermont Route 103, Cavendish
692.
The existing line can be viewed from Route 103, most noticeably when
approaching the crossing from the east, and begin over one-half mile prior to the crossing.
Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at 102.
693.
Views when approaching from the west are mostly screened by mature evergreen
vegetation, except for views of the conductors crossing the roadway. Minor views of the tops of
some structures are possible, but not easily seen. Id.
694.
Minimal views from the recreational fields south of Route 103 are also possible,
but similar to views from the road, west of the crossing, are isolated to the conductors and tops of
the structures. Id.
695.
With the addition of the second line, there will be a noticeable change to the
visual character of the area. Id.
696.
The majority of evergreen vegetation that currently screens views of structure 381
north of the road will be removed. This will open new views of existing and proposed
infrastructure from the road. Views that already exist when approaching the crossing from the
east will allow views of the Project upgrades. Id.
697.
The orientation of views, and the increase in visibility from multiple locations in
the area of the Route 103 crossing, will create an adverse affect to the visual character of the
area. Id. at 102-103.
698.
Impacts at this location will not be unduly adverse. Mitigation plantings are
proposed to create new screening and help replace the loss of the existing evergreen vegetation.
Id.; Exhibit MJB-4 REV, Sheet L12.1.
699.
Petitioners have mitigated the aesthetic impacts by instituting design revisions to
proposed structure 381, which we find will result in a minimal increase in visibility of the
structure, but will not alter the original conclusion that there will be no undue adverse impact at
this location. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 3.
700.
The Selectboard has told Petitioners that it is satisfied with the proposed
mitigation plans. Exhibit Stipulation 5A at 3.
- 116 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 117 of 162
701.
Petitioners and the Department will review the plans in the field and conduct field
modifications as appropriate after the Project is constructed. Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 6.
Coolidge Substation
702.
The existing Coolidge substation consists of a 6-acre fenced area located at the
intersection of Quent Phelan Road, Barker Road, and Nelson Road. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 at
7.
703.
The current substation is of substantial size and is a noticeable element in the
existing landscape. Existing vegetation provides reasonable screening from many surrounding
vantage points. Id. at 8.
704.
The Coolidge substation will be expanded to include a three-bay 345 kV
substation with a breaker and-one-half configuration, a six position 115 kV ring bus, and four
115 kV capacitor banks. Id.
705.
While Project improvements are not substantial in comparison to the existing
substation, the existing fence line will need to move towards Nelson Road to accommodate the
new line. Id. at 118.
706.
The grading will also need to be revised and much of the existing vegetation that
buffers between Nelson Road and the substation will be removed in response to the grading, and
also because of proximity to new infrastructure. Id.
707.
In addition, the new 345 kV line, when entering the substation from the south,
will also result in a large portion of vegetation to be cleared that currently screens views of the
substation. Id.
708.
The mitigation proposed by Petitioners which includes a combination of
landscape plantings and earth berming, will remediate new views created by the expansion of the
substation. Id. at 120; see also Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 5; Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4
REV, Sheet L12.2.
709.
Petitioners also plan to underground an existing distribution line to accommodate
the additional landscaping. See Exhibit Petitioners MJB-4 REV, Sheet L12.2; Tr. 11/6/08 at 141
(Buscher).
- 117 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 118 of 162
710.
Project upgrades will result in adverse impacts at this location, but impacts will
not be unduly adverse. Exhibit Petitioners Supp. RR-25 at 5.
DISCUSSION
As this Board has noted in previous decisions concerning transmission upgrade projects,
“Vermonters are accustomed to the presence of power lines, both distribution and transmission,
in many locations.” In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05
at 82. In this case, the new transmission infrastructure will be introduced into areas where
existing transmission and distribution infrastructure has existed as part of the landscape for
several decades, and fits with the overall context of surrounding development. In several
locations, the proposed Project upgrades will not have any adverse impacts. In the areas
identified as having adverse impacts, reasonable and effective mitigation has been developed
through careful planning and design, and through collaborative discussions among the Petitioners
and the Department of Public Service, and have resulted in a set of comprehensive landscape
mitigation plans that resolve all outstanding aesthetic issues among the Petitioners and the
Department. See Exhibit Stipulation 5 at 2; see generally Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2 and MJB-4
REV.
We are mindful that the Department’s aesthetic consultant has offered testimony that it is
his opinion that the new Newfane Loop may be considered “shocking” to the average person
from certain views. See Tr. 11/6/08 at 157 (Raphael). On the other hand, he acknowledged that
VELCO has made a good faith effort to ameliorate that condition and none of these were viable,
such that the alternative design settled upon between the Department and Petitioners is the best
case. Id. at 156. While we acknowledge Mr. Raphael’s concerns regarding the associated
aesthetic impacts of the new transmission lines exiting and entering the Newfane substation, we
do not agree that the Project as proposed will be “shocking” or result in an undue adverse
aesthetic impact, for several reasons.
First, in considering the potential for adversity of any project, we start with the
understanding that “application of Criterion 8 does not guarantee that the landscape will not
- 118 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 119 of 162
change: Criterion 8 was not intended to prevent all change to the landscape of Vermont or to
guarantee that the view a person sees from his or her property will remain the same forever.
Change must and will come, and Criterion 8 will not be an impediment. Criterion 8 was intended
to insure that as development does occur, reasonable consideration will be given to the visual
impacts on neighboring landowners, the local community, and on the specific scenic resources of
Vermont.” Re: The Van Sicklen Partnership #4C1013R-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of
Law and Order 3/8/02) at 36 (citing In Re: Okemo Mountain, Inc. #2W5051-8-EB (Findings of
Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 12/18/86) at 9); see also In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability
Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 140; and see, Re: Pike Industries, Inc. and Inez M.
Lemieux #5R1415-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order 6/7/05) at 39; Re: Main
Street Landing Company and City of Burlington #401068-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of
Law, and Order 11/20/01) at 17-18. In this case, not only is the transmission infrastructure an
existing part of the existing Project area landscape, but Petitioners have taken measures to
maximize co-location of new lines and substation upgrades at locations of existing transmission
corridors and substation sites. The exception to this is the new Newfane substation. However,
as we discuss below, this choice in siting itself was undertaken as a mitigation measure.
Second, while we must consider site-specific effects of the Project, we must consider the
Project as a whole and its cumulative aesthetic impacts, and not review portions simply as if they
were stand-alone projects. In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of
1/28/05 at 80. The Newfane Loop is not a stand-alone project, but is an integral part of the
Southern Loop Project and, in particular, the Newfane substation injection point into the CVPS
subtransmission system. The choice for siting the substation at Newfane was undertaken as a
deliberate mitigation measure to address the siting concerns associated with the previously
considered Dummerston substation site. The experts and public opinions voiced
overwhelmingly support that this design change represents an improvement to the originally
conceived Project design. The lines associated with the Newfane Loop must of necessity be
located in this area to connect to the Newfane substation.
- 119 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 120 of 162
Third, the Legislature has directed that this Board determine what is acceptable in terms
of new development’s impact on aesthetics and scenic and natural beauty. If our sensibilities
are, collectively, offended by a project, its impact under Criterion 8 is undue. Re: Robert B. and
Deborah McShinsky #3W0530-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 4/21/88) at
8-9. It is not enough that we might prefer to see a different design, or that we might prefer a
different type of land use, but that the project, when viewed as a whole, is offensive or shocking,
because it is out of character with its surroundings, or significantly diminishes the scenic
qualities of the area. Id. at 9.
Not only is the threshold for establishing that a development is “shocking and offensive”
high, see Re: Pike Industries, Inc. and Inez M. Lemieux #5R1415-EB (Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law, and Order 6/7/05) at 43, but this determination is highly subjective, as the
Board must determine what the sensitivities of the average person are and then decide whether
such sensitivities are shocked or offended by the Project. Re: EPE Realty Corporation and
Fergessen Management, Ltd. #3W0865-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order
11/24/04) at 32.
The proposed Southern Loop Project is not so out of character with its surroundings nor
does it significantly diminish the scenic qualities of the area such that it can be considered
“shocking and offensive.” With respect to the aesthetic impacts of the so-called Newfane Loop,
we must consider that the views of the Project from two public vantage points as the line
descends a ridgeline are limited. From River Road, which is not a highly travelled road, the
Project is seen at a considerable distance for approximately 1000 feet. Exhibit Petitioners MJB-2
at 114. We have previously recognized that distant views of a project do not rise to the level of
“shocking and offensive.” Petition of UPC Vermont Wind, LLC, Docket No. 7156, Order of
8/8/07 at 5 ("The majority of views of the project are from a distance such that size would not be
overwhelming. Viewed from such distances the average person would not find the scale of the
project shocking or offensive"). Moreover, from Route 30, the Newfane Loop is visible for only
a matter of seconds.
- 120 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 121 of 162
Finally, we acknowledge that our assessment of whether a particular project will have an
undue adverse impact on aesthetics is “significantly informed by overall societal benefits of the
project.” In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 80. The
Petitioners are not required to adopt the optimal aesthetic approach; rather, we consider whether
they have appropriately balanced the relevant cost, aesthetic and technical considerations. In re
Vermont Electric Power Company, 179 Vt. 370, 381, 895 A.2d 226 (2006). In this case, the
Petitioners have clearly undertaken a careful balancing of these factors, not just as to the
Newfane Loop, but for the Project as a whole. We recognize that the Newfane Loop was
proposed by the Petitioners in response to public opposition to the previously considered West
Dummerston Substation and West Dummerston Loop. We consider this revision to represent an
overall societal benefit. Moreover, the Memorandum of Understanding among the Petitioners
and the Department of Public Service concludes that the design for the proposed Newfane Loop
represents the optimal design based on aesthetics and costs. With these considerations, in
addition to the societal benefits discussed separately in this Order, it is evident the Petitioners
have presented a design for the Newfane Loop that appropriately balances aesthetics, cost and
technical considerations.
Based upon the applicable law and the facts presented in this case, we conclude that the
Project will not result in an undue adverse effect on aesthetics, provided that the Petitioners
comply with the terms and conditions set forth in the Memorandum of Understanding among the
Petitioners and the Department of Public Service.
Rare and Irreplaceable Natural Areas
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(8)]
711.
The Project will not have an undue adverse effect on any rare and irreplaceable
natural areas (“RINA”). This finding is supported by findings 712 through 731, below.
712.
Under Act 250 Criterion 8, an area can be considered “rare and irreplaceable” if
the natural community type occurs infrequently in Vermont; hosts rare plants; or is a valuable
educational and scientific resource. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 42.
- 121 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 122 of 162
713.
There is no specific list of RINA protected by Act 250 Criterion 8. However, the
list of State Natural Communities Areas (Thompson and Sorenson, 2000) and the database of
“significant natural communities” maintained by the NNHP were used as references to evaluate
potential natural communities in the Project Study Area. Id. at 37-38.
714.
ANR witness Eric Sorenson identified five natural plant communities as to which
he recommended that special protection or mitigation be undertaken to avoid undue adverse
impacts resulting from the Project. These natural communities are located at: the West River
Crossing at Williamsville Station; the West River Crossing at the Newfane Tap; the Grassy
Brook Crossing at Grassy Brook Road in Brookline; the crossing of Wetland T-15 at Deer
Valley Road in Townshend; and the crossing of Wetland CA-20 at the Black River in Cavendish.
Sorenson reb. pf at 1-2; see also Sorenson pf. at 3-5.
715.
The Petitioners and ANR have agreed upon a Natural Area Protection Plan to
protect the five natural areas identified by ANR in order to avoid or mitigate impacts to those
areas. See Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 4-5 and Appendix B.
716.
The Petitioners and ANR agree that the measures set forth in the Natural Area
Protection Plan address all outstanding concerns of ANR with respect to natural communities,
and include all necessary conditions with respect to the Project’s potential impacts under 30
V.S.A. § 248(b)(5). Id. at 1.
717.
As to each natural area, the Petitioners have agreed to certain pre-construction,
clearing, construction and maintenance measures to mitigate impacts associated with
construction of the Project, as well as measures designed to compensate for unavoidable impacts
to these natural areas. See Exhibit Stipulation 1, Appendix B.
718.
Prior to construction, the Petitioners have agreed to provide boundaries of each
natural area on the Project plans and include special protection measures in Project-specific
environmental training to contractors and mark the boundaries of each natural area using
flagging and barrier tape. Id.
719.
At the West River Crossing at Williamsville Station, the Petitioners will
demarcate nearby populations of RTE species with flagging/barrier tape. Id. at 1.
- 122 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 123 of 162
720.
At Wetland CA-20, the Black River Crossing, the Petitioners will transplant
rough aven populations to the western edge of the corridor in accordance with the Rare Plant
Protection Plan included with the Memorandum of Understanding. Id. at 5; see Exhibit
Stipulation 1, Appendix C.
721.
As to clearing in all natural areas, work will be performed under the oversight of
the Project Environmental Compliance Inspector(s). Exhibit Stipulation 1, Appendix B.
722.
At the West River Crossing at Williamsville Station, the West River Crossing at
the Newfane Tap and the Grassy Brook Crossing, clearing will be performed by hand utilizing
the “drop and lop” method, with vegetation cut into smaller pieces and left in place. No heavy
equipment will be used within the natural areas. Id. at 2, 3, and 4.
723.
At the West River Crossing in Williamsville Station, VELCO will not broadcast
wood chips into RTE plant areas or within the “seep area” on the northern bank of the West
River. Trees to be cut proximate to RTE will be felled away from the plant areas. Id. at 2.
724.
For Wetland T-15, the Simpsonville Swamp, VELCO will perform a delineation
of sweet gale shoreline before the start of work and during the growing season in order to
delineate the boundary of the natural area. Clearing will be performed as shown on Sheet
NAPP-4 of the Natural Area Protection Plan and associated ACOE and ANR permit
authorizations, with no heavy equipment used in the flagged natural area. Wood chips will not
be broadcast into the flagged area. VELCO will remove any temporary impacts (construction
matting) within one week following clearing. Id. at 5.
725.
At Wetland CA-20, the Black River Crossing, clearing will be performed in
accordance with the provisions of the CUD, wood chips will be broadcast into the existing
corridor to the fullest extent practicable, and VELCO will scatter tops of trees to the fullest
extent practicable. Id. at 6.
726.
During construction at the West River Crossing at Williamsville Station and the
West River Crossing at the Newfane Tap, inspections will be conducted on foot. In those
locations as well as the Grassy Brook Crossing, conductor stringing will be conducted by hand or
aerially (e.g., shooting conductors across river, helicopter), if feasible. If such methods are not
- 123 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 124 of 162
feasible, equipment may be used but shall be limited to ATV or low ground pressure equipment,
with no heavy machinery used in flagged areas. Id. at 2, 3, 4.
727.
At Wetland T-15, construction (conductor stringing, inspections, etc.) will be
conducted on foot or from a boat for open water areas, with no tracked or wheeled motorized
vehicles entering the wetland, other than the limited areas where tree clearing is necessary. Id. at
5.
728.
At Wetland CA-20, equipment needed for construction will be limited to ATV or
low ground pressure equipment, with no heavy equipment used in flagged areas. Id. at 6.
729.
As to maintenance for all natural areas, VELCO has agreed that vegetation will be
left to the maximum height possible in accordance with VELCO’s Transmission Vegetation
Management Plan and associated electrical reliability standards. VELCO will maintain
vegetation in accordance with its 4-year cycle with hand cutting or targeted application of
herbicides, unless this work is superseded by the development of the “Best Management
Practices for Vegetative Maintenance.” Id. at 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
730.
In addition, at Wetland T-15, VELCO will control non-native invasive shrubs
(honeysuckle and others) in the flagged natural area and adjacent upland 50-foot buffer zone
with targeted application of herbicide, contingent upon landowner approval, or other methods
agreed to by VELCO, ANR and the landowner. Id. at 5.
731.
The Project will result in the impacts to approximately two (2) acres of forested
floodplain natural communities, resulting in a four (4) acre mitigation requirement. To satisfy
this mitigation requirement, VELCO will:
Include the conservation of suitable areas of forested floodplain in the Project
wetland mitigation effort;
Conserve suitable areas of forested floodplain on existing VELCO property,
and/or;
Acquire and/or conserve suitable areas of forested floodplain, preferably on the
West River.
- 124 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 125 of 162
Mitigation efforts will be completed within one year following completion of
construction or before May 2011, whichever is later.
Id. at 7.
Necessary Wildlife Habitat & Endangered Species
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(8)(A)]
732.
The Project will not destroy or significantly imperil necessary wildlife habitat or
any endangered species. This finding is supported by findings 733 through 750, below; Exhibit
Stipulation 1 at 1.
Wildlife Habitat
733.
The Act 250 criterion for wildlife habitat defines “necessary wildlife habitat” as
“concentrated habitat which is identifiable and is demonstrated as being decisive to the survival
of a species of wildlife at any period in its life, including breeding and migratory periods” (10
V.S.A. Section 6001(12)). Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 43.
734.
The Project may impact fourteen deer wintering areas, totaling approximately 110
acres, as a result of clearing associated with the Project. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 3.
735.
The Petitioners will, within two years of the issuance of the CPG implement the
deer mitigation effort that will include the conservation of additional land for deer wintering
areas, in accordance with the 2/1 and 4/1 ratios set forth in the ANR’s Deer Mitigation
Guidelines. Id.
736.
The deer mitigation will include: (1) conservation of between 220 – 440
additional acres of habitat on land already owned by VELCO, with final amounts to be mutually
agreed upon by the parties, and (2) development of wildlife crossing areas through vegetation
management techniques designed to favor vegetation that can support snow (softwoods) and
thereby keep the snow depth on the ground shallow enough for deer to move through the travel
lanes, which crossings will be mapped by Petitioners. Id.
737.
The specific practices to be employed in the wildlife crossings will include: (1)
selective removal of trees favoring crown closure; (2) removing cut material or cutting up small
enough so as not to interfere with animal movement in the travel lane; (3) promoting compatible
- 125 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 126 of 162
species of trees and shrubs; (4) favoring continued growth and reproduction of coniferous
vegetation with canopies that intercept snow. Id.
738.
We find that these mitigation measures will adequately mitigate Project impacts
so that the Project will not destroy or significantly imperil necessary wildlife habitat.
Threatened and Endangered Species
739.
There is only one animal species listed as threatened or endangered that may
potentially be impacted by the Project, the Eastern racer (Coluber constrictor) snake, a species of
snake listed as “threatened” in Vermont. Id.
740.
There have been no sightings of the Eastern racer in the Project corridor or
substation sites, although this species has previously been sighted in southern Vermont. Id.
741.
The Petitioners have completed a survey of the corridor, and none were found.
742.
In addition, the Parties have worked collaboratively to develop a mitigation plan
Id.
to reduce the risk of impacting the Eastern racer snake, should the species be discovered during
construction. Id. at 3-4.
743.
Populations of two endangered plant species, the Barbed-bristle bulrush (Scirpus
ancistrochaetus) and Greene’s rush (Juncus greenei), and one threatened species, the Three-bird
orchid (Triphora trianthophora), have been identified in or near the Project area. Id. at 4.
744.
The Petitioners have developed a Protection Plan for the Barbed-bristle bulrush
and we find that the avoidance and mitigation measures contained therein are reasonable and
sufficient and preclude the need for a takings permit. Id.; see Exhibit Stipulation 1 at Appendix
A.
745.
Impacts to Greene’s rush will be avoided as a result of use of alternate
construction access routes and construction activity sites. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 4.
746.
In addition, the Petitioners will employ protective measures for avoiding Greene’s
rush including locating occurrences of the species on project plans, signage, installation of
barriers surrounding the area of occurrence, environmental training for contractors, compliance
monitoring and oversight, and close coordination with contractors. Id.
- 126 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 127 of 162
747.
A cluster of the Three-bird orchid (Triphora trianthophora) was identified at the
edge of, but within the proposed area of clearing for, the new Project corridor. Id.
748.
The parties have worked collaboratively to develop a mitigation plan for this
species, which we find will prevent any undue adverse impacts to this plant species. See id.
749.
Although rare and uncommon plants are not subject to Act 250 Criterion 8(A), the
Petitioners and ANR have identified eight rare and uncommon plant species along the Project
corridor as to which Petitioners have agreed to apply special conditions in order to avoid or
mitigate impacts. These locations and protection measures are set forth in the Southern Loop
Rare Plant Protection Plan. Id. at 5 and Appendix C; see also Damiano/Connaughton/Stamatov
reb. pf. at 7.
750.
No specific mitigation, avoidance, monitoring or other restrictions shall apply to
rare or uncommon plant species in connection with the Project, except as set forth in the Rare
Plant Protection Plan. Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 5.
Historic Sites
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(8) ]
751.
The proposed Project will not have an undue adverse effect on historic resources.
This finding is supported by findings 752 through 783, below.
Archaeological Resources
752.
VELCO retained The Louis Berger Group, Inc. (“Berger”), to prepare an
Archaeological Resource Assessment (“ARA”) and Scope of Work (“SOW”). Dr. Luhman has
previously testified on historic sites impacts for the Deerfield project in Searsburg, Vermont
(Docket No. 7250), as well as the East Avenue Loop project in Chittenden County (Docket No.
7314). Berger personnel have had extensive professional training and experience in evaluating
development impacts upon cultural resources. Luhman pf. at 2-3; Exhibit Petitioners HL-1;
Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 2-3; Exhibit Petitioners Reb. LGR-1 and LGR-2.
- 127 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 128 of 162
753.
The purpose of the ARA was to summarize the results of the research to identify
recorded and known archaeological sites within the Project area, as well as to look for other
archaeologically-sensitive areas that could be adversely affected by the Project. Id.
754.
There are no standing structures within the ROW that are or might be considered
eligible for the National Register. There are no archaeological landmarks included in the
National Register or state register of historic places within the Project area.
Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 19; Exhibit Petitioners HL-1 at 51-55.
755.
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (“Council”) did not enter an
appearance in this proceeding, nor has any party brought to the attention of the Board any
testimony presented by the Council related to the Project area in other proceedings.
756.
Berger identified 53 areas of potential archaeological sensitivity through
background research involving a review of precontact information concerning the area, Town
Plans and histories for each of the municipalities traversed by the corridor, and a review of
known archaeological sites at the Agency of Commerce and Community Development Division
for Historic Preservation (“DHP”) office in Montpelier. Luhman pf. at 3; Exhibit Petitioners
HL-1 at 5-47.
757.
After completing the background research, Berger conducted a field inspection, or
pedestrian survey, of the entire ROW in order to identify landforms that could be considered
“sensitive” or “non-sensitive” for purposes of further archaeological testing. Luhman pf. at 3;
Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 6-7; Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 38.
758.
The DHP has developed Guidelines and an Environmental Predictive Model for
Locating Precontact Archaeological Sites to determine the sensitivity of a site based on a
quantitative method. The DHP’s model contains a list of 28 factors that contribute or detract
from a location’s archaeological sensitivity. Berger used the DHP’s model in conducting its
field survey, and assigned a score to each area determined to be sensitive based on background
research. A total of 21 areas scored 33 or higher on the DHP model, meaning that they are
considered “sensitive” under that model. However, Berger did not rely exclusively on the DHP
model in determining where testing should be completed, and included several areas scoring
- 128 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 129 of 162
below 33. Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 8, 13-14; see also Exhibit Petitioners HL-1, Appendix
A (containing scores for each area).
759.
Instead, Berger reviewed several qualitative factors to make recommendations for
additional testing in areas scoring below 33 under the DHP model. The qualitative factors used
during the field study included the following:

Proximity to water
o Rivers or streams (either permanent or intermittent)
o Confluences
o Spring heads
o Ponds or lakes
o Wetlands (of any size)

Landforms
o Floodplains
o Alluvial terrace
o Islands
o Prominent elevated landforms
o Rockshelters
o Excessive slope


Areas of heavy erosion exposing bedrock
Areas of significant development and disturbance
Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 14-15.
760.
In addition to the DHP quantitative model and its own qualitative factors, Berger
also relied on previous work completed by the Consulting Archaeology Program at the
University of Vermont, and Berger’s own research and experience on projects in upland and
mountainous contexts in other parts of the Northeastern United States. Id. at 7-8.
761.
Ultimately, Berger aimed in the field survey to identify areas that presented some
potential for containing archaeological sites. This included potential locations outside areas
preliminarily identified as sensitive through background research. Id. at 9, 15; Exhibit
Petitioners HL-1 at 47.
762.
The mountainous terrain across almost the entire Project area (basically all
locations except along the Connecticut and West Rivers) resulted in Berger identifying 5.2
- 129 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 130 of 162
percent of the Project area as “sensitive,” using Berger’s quantitative and qualitative criteria.
Luhman/Gould/Rinehart pf. at 19.
763.
Following completion of the ARA, to ensure that no unknown historic sites are
affected by the Project, and consistent with past projects, Berger proposed to undertake
additional field investigations involving both surface inspections and subsurface surveys in
sensitive areas. Luhman pf. at 4.
764.
Subsurface surveys typically rely on shovel tests, but other types of excavation,
such as larger measured excavation units, hand trenching, or machine trenching, are used where
appropriate. The DHP guidelines specify that the standard shovel test is a square unit measuring
50 by 50 centimeters. Id. at 4.
765.
Shovel tests sample areas of sensitivity using grid, transect or cluster designs as
appropriate to the anticipated characteristics of the resource. The DHP guidelines indicate that
the standard maximum spacing of shovel tests in areas of sensitivity is ten meters. Soil from
shovel tests is processed through six-millimeter mesh sieves to assure systematic artifact
recovery, and all artifacts obtained during subsurface testing are retained for laboratory
processing and analysis. Id. at 4.
766.
During the Phase I subsurface survey, all shovel tests extend into the C-horizon.
When artifacts are encountered, additional tests are conducted. Decisions about the extent of
supplementary investigations during Phase I investigations revolve around the Principal
Investigator’s judgment as to whether the additional information obtained by the testing will
materially advance the investigation, resource management and/or project planning and design.
Id. at 4-5.
767.
Any deep excavations are conducted in a manner consistent with the trenching
and shoring regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Deep tests
continue until late glacial sediments or cobble-rich alluvial deposits are encountered. Profiles are
inspected for evidence of paleosols or other depositional features that could indicate the presence
of deeply buried archaeological deposits. Soil removed from hand-excavated measured test units
- 130 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 131 of 162
are screened to recover any artifacts that may be present, and, if appropriate, deposits exposed
through backhoe trenching are sampled to determine whether artifacts may be present. Id. at 5.
768.
Where deep deposits are a possibility, Berger uses a different suite of techniques
for Phase I survey than those used for areas with shallow deposits. For example, a staged
approach to a Phase I may be appropriate, where a series of backhoe trenches are first used to
evaluate patterns of deposition and test units are than placed in areas that appear to have the
greatest potential for site occurrence and preservation. Berger uses project-specific testing
strategies where there is a potential for deeply buried deposits. Id. at 5-6.
769.
If archaeological sites are identified during the Phase I subsurface survey, a
determination is made as to whether the sites may be avoided. Where avoidance is not possible,
additional investigation is completed at the site-examination (Phase II) level to ascertain site
boundaries with respect to the proposed activities. If the consultants then determine that the
archaeological site is eligible for the National Resister and that project-related impacts will
occur, a data recovery plan (“DRP”) is prepared to guide any Phase III or data recovery
excavations that may be necessary. Id. at 6.
770.
The DHP and the State Historic Preservation Officer (“SHPO”) are provided with
copies of each petition for certificate of public good. 30 V.S.A. § 248(a)(4)(C). Unlike the
Agency of Natural Resources, the DHP is not statutorily required to appear as a party in a
certificate of public good proceeding. Cf. 30 V.S.A. §248(a)(4)(E).
771.
The DHP withdrew from participation in this proceeding before the technical
hearings. DHP Notice of Withdrawal from Docket No. 7373, October 6, 2008. Consequently,
the DHP has not introduced any prefiled testimony or exhibits into the evidentiary record, nor
has any party to this proceeding objected to the ARA and Berger’s proposed SOW.
772.
The DHP anticipated that it would work collaboratively with VELCO with
respect to archaeological impacts of the Project pursuant to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(“Corps”) permitting under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (the “Federal
Act”). 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(c)(1); DHP Notice of Withdrawal from Docket No. 7373, October 6,
2008.
- 131 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 132 of 162
DISCUSSION
A.
Legal Standard
Under 30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(5), the Board is required to determine whether a proposed
facility will "have an undue adverse effect on … historic sites," with the Board giving "due
consideration" to certain specified criterion under 10 V.S.A. § 6001 et seq. (“Act 250”),
including Criterion 8 of Act 250 relating to historic sites. In re: Petition of UPC Wind
Management, LLC, Docket No. 6884, Order of 4/21/2004 at 20-21. Under Criterion 8 of Act
250, a proposed project must not have an undue adverse effect on historic sites. 10 V.S.A. §
6086(a)(8). In prior orders, we have commented that in assessing the environmental impacts
under 30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(5), a determination as to the existence of an undue adverse effect is
“significantly informed by the overall societal benefits of the project,” so that a project “with
adverse environmental effects may still be approved under Section 248 if … shown to be
necessary for the public good.” In re: Petition of Town of Stowe Electric Dept., Docket No.
6793, Order of 5/5/2003 at 17.
Criterion 8 of Act 250 sets forth a three-part test for evaluating the potential effects of a
project upon historic sites: “(a) whether the Project site is or contains an historic site; (b) whether
the Project will have an adverse effect on the historic site; and (c) whether any such adverse
effect will be undue.” In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of
1/28/05 at 170; Re: OMYA, Inc. and Foster Brothers Farm, Inc. #9A0107-2-EB (Findings of
Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 5/25/99) at 39-41. For the first prong of the test, “historic
sites” is defined under Act 250 as “any site, structure, district or archaeological landmark which
has been officially included in the National Register of Historic Places and/or the state register of
historic places or which is established by testimony of the Vermont Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation as being historically significant.” 10 V.S.A. § 6001(9). Moreover, as the
Board recently affirmed, the only three ways in which a site’s historic nature may be established
under Act 250 are (1) placement on the National Register of Historic Places; (2) placement on
the Vermont register of historic places; and (3) “persuasive evidence of historic significance
brought before the Board … by the testimony of the Vermont Advisory Council on Historic
- 132 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 133 of 162
Preservation.” In re: Sheffield Wind Project, Docket No. 7156, Order of 8/8/07 at 78 (citing Re:
Middlebury College # 9A0177-EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 1/26/90) at
9, 11.
With respect to the second prong of the test, an “adverse effect” on a historic site for
purposes of Criterion 8 is determined based upon whether a proposed project is in harmony or
fits with the historic context of the site. Sheffield at 78; Middlebury College at 10. As the Board
recognized in Sheffield, “Important guidelines in evaluating this fit include: (1) whether there
will be physical destruction, damage, or alteration of those qualities which make the site historic,
such as an existing structure, landscape, or setting; and (2) whether the proposed project will
have other effects on the historic structure, landscape, or setting which are incongruous or
incompatible with the site's historic qualities, including, but not limited to, such effects as
isolation of an historic structure from its historic setting, new property uses, or new visual,
audible or atmospheric elements.” Sheffield at 78.
Regarding the third prong of the test, the evaluation of whether an adverse effect is undue
is based on any one of the following guidelines:
a.
The failure of an applicant to take generally available mitigating steps
which a reasonable person would take to preserve the character of the
historic site.
b.
Interference on the part of the proposed project with the ability of the
public to interpret or appreciate the historic qualities of the site.
c.
Cumulative effects on the historic qualities of the site by the various components
of a proposed project which, when taken together, are so significant that they
create an unacceptable impact.
d.
Violation of a clear, written community standard which is intended to
preserve the historic qualities of the site.
Sheffield at 79; Middlebury College at 9-10.
The burden of proof for establishing non-compliance with Criterion 8 rests with the party
opposing a project – that party must establish an “unreasonable or adverse effect” on an
identified historic site. 10 V.S.A. § 6088(b). Nevertheless, the Vermont Supreme Court has
- 133 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 134 of 162
interpreted Section 6088(a) to grant a reviewing entity the ability to consider the sufficiency of
an applicant’s evidence in order to render positive findings, even in the absence of formal
opposition from a third party. In re Denio, 158 Vt. 230, 237 (1992); see also In re Tariff of
Central Vermont Public Service Corp., 167 Vt. 626, 627 (1997). A project applicant can satisfy
the threshold evidentiary standard by obtaining input from DHP, or procuring a professional
analysis. Cf. Re: Watchtower Wireless Cell Tower, No. 21-2-06, Order of August 23, 2006 (Vt.
Env. Ct.). However, an affirmation supported by a reasonable good faith effort on the part of a
project applicant may be sufficient to satisfy the burden of production under the right
circumstances. Accord Petition of Neighborhood Energy, LLC, Docket No. 7413, Order of
6/5/2008 at 10 (rendering positive findings on Criterion 8 for methane generation facility based
on farmer’s testimony).
B.
The Project’s Compliance with Criterion 8
We find that the Petitioners have satisfied their burden of proof under Criterion 8 for
archaeological resources by demonstrating that there are no actual historic sites affected by the
Project, and by undertaking a professional evaluation of impacts on potential historic sites within
the areas potentially affected by the Project. The Petitioners have satisfied the first prong of the
Criterion 8 test because there are no sites affected by the Project that are listed on the Vermont or
National Registers of Historic Places. The Vermont Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
was not a party to this proceeding, and based on Berger’s background research there is no reason
to believe the Advisory Council provided testimony in any other proceeding concerning the
presence of potential sites in the Project area.
Furthermore, Berger has thoroughly assessed the potential for archaeological sites to be
present within the Project corridor, along ROW access roads, and in construction staging areas.
Berger undertook a survey using a sound methodology using quantitative and qualitative criteria.
The Board takes note of Berger’s professional credentials and their extensive experience in
assessing the impact of transmission and generation projects in Vermont and elsewhere, as
documented in testimony and exhibits. We find, following our review of the evidence, that there
are no known or recorded archaeological sites within the ROW or the other areas of the Project
- 134 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 135 of 162
(e.g., access roads) that qualify as “historic sites” for purposes of 10 V.S.A. §§ 6086(a)(8) and
6001(9). The record evidence is thorough and credible on the non-existence of any
archaeological remains that presently constitute an “historic site” for purposes of 30 V.S.A. §
248(b)(5), which in turn allows us to conclude that there will be no undue adverse effect on
underground historic sites.
Based on the ARA, the expert testimony of Dr. Luhman and other Berger representatives,
the Board finds and concludes that the Project as presently proposed will have no undue adverse
effect on historic sites for purposes of 30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(5) and 10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(8). We
are cognizant that the final results of Berger’s post-ARA survey had not yet been introduced into
evidence, but we also note that in connection with the wetlands permits required for the Project,
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will assess the Project’s impacts on “historic properties”
pursuant to the Federal Act. Specifically, the Corps is required to review the Project as an
“undertaking” pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.1 et seq. and its own formal procedure for consulting
with state historic preservation officers, local governments, Indian tribes, and interested citizens
on the Project’s impacts. We therefore will require that Petitioners file with the Board and
parties to this docket a copy of the End of Field (“EOF”) Letter being delivered to the Corps
summarizing the results of the post-ARA field work, and providing any recommendations for
mitigation, or confirming that any newly-identified historic sites can be avoided. Dr. Luhman’s
testimony and other evidence establishes that the Petitioners have an appropriate plan in place to
ensure that if a newly identified historic sites are identified, they will be avoided to prevent an
undue adverse effect as required by statute. We emphasize that the purpose of filing the EOF
letter is to keep the Board and other parties informed as to the status of the archaeological work
but is not intended to require any additional proceedings, unless appropriate motions are made in
accordance with the Board’s Rules of Practice.
- 135 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 136 of 162
Above Ground Historic Resources
773.
“Historic properties” are defined under federal and state law as “buildings or
structures being at least fifty years of age and retaining original or historic architectural or
structural integrity.” Luhman/Ciuffo/Buscher pf. at 6, citing In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability
Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 168.
774.
A total of 30 properties were initially identified as historic within theArea of
Potential Effect (“APE”) of the Project. 11 of these individual properties were previously listed
in the Vermont State Register within the APE, and 19 are considered eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places. Luhman/Ciuffo/Buscher pf. at 8.
775.
Of these 30 properties, there are only two cases in which the transmission line is
visible with an adverse effect within a property’s significant viewshed: Guilford-4, located at
1430 Guilford Road in the Town of Guilford, and a neighboring property Guilford-5, the
Weatherhead House along Guilford Road. Both properties are previously unsurveyed historic
properties potentially eligible for the National Register. Id. at 9-10; Exhibit Petitioners LCB-3 at
171.
776.
In addition to the 30 properties identified by the Petitioners, 56 historic properties
were identified by DHP as eligible for the National Register. Accordingly, the Project will
impact a total of 86 properties either listed or eligible for listing on the Vermont State Register
and/or National Register of Historic Places. See Exhibit Petitioners Rebuttal LCB-1.
777.
The Petitioners conducted a supplemental viewshed analysis to determine the
Project’s impacts on the additional properties identified by DHP. Of these 56 properties, 17 will
have visibility to the new 345 kV transmission line. Significant viewsheds of 7 of these
properties will be adversely affected by the Project. The seven properties include: Vernon-9
(510 Governor Hunt Road), Vernon-10 (546 Governor Hunt Road), Vernon-20 (1569 Fort
Bridgeman Road), Vernon-21 (5 Tyler Hill Road), Vernon-27 (1730-1732 Fort Bridgeman
Road), Brattleboro-19 (151 Covey Road) and Cavendish-2 (3404 VT Route 103). Id. at 3.
- 136 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 137 of 162
778.
We find that potential adverse impacts to these properties are mitigated by the
placement of the new lines on the far (west) side of the existing corridor, matching pole spans to
the existing corridor. Luhman/Ciuffo/Buscher pf. at 10; Exhibit Petitioners LCB-3 at 171.
779.
In addition, VELCO plans to install landscape mitigation plantings along the
corridor to add screening with respect to the current view of the existing 345 kV line. Id.
780.
The proposed landscape mitigation plantings along Guilford Center Road will add
screening, which is in fact an improvement with respect to the current view of the existing 345
kV line in this corridor. Id.
781.
As for all historic properties evaluated, the Project does not interfere with the
general public’s ability to interpret and/or appreciate the historic qualities of the historic sites
evaluated in the Project Report and Addendum Report. Exhibit Petitioners LCB-3 at 171;
Exhibit Petitioners Reb. LCB-1 at 3.
782.
The cumulative effects on the historic qualities of the sites by various Project
components do not create an unacceptable effect, and the Project does not violate a clear written
community standard intended to preserve historic qualities of a site. Id.
783.
The current existence of a transmission line within the viewshed and setting of the
historic properties allows that a new line, which will only have an incremental impact, will be
consistent with the context of that land use. Id.
DISCUSSION
We evaluate a project’s compliance with Criterion 8 of Act 250 with respect to aboveground historic sites under the same legal standard articulated above with respect to
archaeological resources. See Discussion of Archaeological Resources at Section A, supra; see
also In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 170;
Luhman/Ciuffo/Buscher pf. at 5; Re: OMYA, Inc. and Foster Brothers Farm, Inc. #9A0107-2EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 5/25/99) at 39-41; and see In re: Sheffield
Wind Project, Docket No. 7156, Order of 8/8/07 at 78 (citing Re: Middlebury College #9A0177EB (Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order 1/26/90) at 9, 11.
- 137 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 138 of 162
In this instance, we are satisfied that the Project complies with Act 250 Criterion 8. The
Petitioners have engaged in a thorough investigation to identify historic properties within the
viewshed impacted by the proposed Project. Initially, the Petitioners identified 30 properties as
either listed in the Vermont State Register or eligible for listing in the National Register within
the APE of the Project. Following the recommendation of the Vermont Division for Historic
Preservation that an additional 56 properties should be considered eligible for the State Historic
Register, the Petitioners engaged in a supplemental viewshed analysis. Of these 86 properties,
only 9 will be adversely impacted by the Project. However, the Petitioners have demonstrated
that such impacts will be sufficiently mitigated so as to avoid an undue adverse impact through
careful design of the line and use of mitigation plantings. DHP has concurred with the
Petitioners’ conclusion that none of the impacts to these properties will be unduly adverse.
Development Affecting Public Investments
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(9)(K)]
784.
The Project will not materially jeopardize or interfere with the function,
efficiency, safety, or the public’s use, access to, or enjoyment of public resources, facilities,
services, or lands. This finding is supported by findings 785 through 789, below.
785.
Failure to upgrade the transmission facilities as they presently exist, given the
reliability risks, poses the greatest threat to public investments. Stamatov pf. at 16.
786.
The new Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line will span across several highways and
public roads, including interstate 89 in Vernon. Id. at 16.
787.
No pole structures will be constructed within the road rights-of-way. Id.
788.
The Project transmission lines will also span several rivers, as noted in Exhibit
Petitioners SD-2. Petitioners will undertake appropriate construction and EPSC measures to
protect these resources, including measures outlined in the Transmission Vegetation
Management Plan. Id.; see Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 14, 17.
789.
Based on title research of adjoining property owners, no other potentially-affected
public lands were identified. Stamatov pf. at 16.
- 138 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 139 of 162
Transmission Vegetation Management
790.
As the Transmission Operator (“TO”) of the Vermont high voltage electric
transmission network, and TO of a portion of the interconnected regional and national
transmission electric grid, VELCO must manage vegetation in its ROWs to prevent contact
between its transmission lines and vegetation. Disorda pf. at 3.
791.
Contact between vegetation and conductors can result in sustained transmission
system outages and could directly contribute to power system instability, separations, or a
cascading sequence of failures. Id.; Exhibit Petitioners JD-3.
792.
Maintenance of sufficient vertical clearances between conductors and vegetation
is essential because direct physical contact is not necessary for a line outage to occur. An
electric arc can occur between a part of a tree and a conductor without sufficient clearance.
Disorda pf. at 6-7; Exhibit Petitioners JD-3 at 10.
793.
The FERC has identified a number of recommended good utility vegetation
management practices, including establishment of a wire zone – border zone, which the FERC
stated is both effective and environmentally friendly in ensuring reliability. This method
involves creating a low-growing vegetation environment directly under transmission lines, which
physically prevents dangerous vegetation from encroaching into energized transmission
facilities. Disorda pf. at 7.
794.
On March 16, 2007, FERC adopted the NERC Transmission Vegetation
Management Reliability Standard, FAC-003-1 (Exhibit Petitioners JD-4), subject to the
requirement that NERC subject the standard to its development process to extend the
applicability of the standard to lower voltage facilities that have an impact on reliability. FERC
Order No. 693, at 201; Disorda pf. at 8.
795.
The NERC Vegetation Management Reliability Standard establishes two primary
reliability requirements: Requirement R1 requires a transmission owner to develop a
transmission vegetation management program, and Requirement R2 requires a transmission
owner to implement the program and to document its implementation. Each program must be
- 139 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 140 of 162
designed for the geographical area and specific design configurations of the transmission
owner’s system. FERC Order No. 693, at 198; Disorda pf. at 8.
796.
VELCO has prepared a Transmission Vegetation Management Plan (“TVMP”) in
accordance with the NERC Standard. See Exhibit Petitioners JD-2.
797.
The NERC Standard is mandatory, and applies to all transmission lines operated
at 200 kV and above and to any lower voltage lines designated by the Regional Reliability
Organization (“NPCC”) as critical to the reliability of the electric system in the region. Disorda
pf. at 9; Exhibit Petitioners JD-4 at ¶ A.4.3.
798.
The NERC Standard applies to the existing Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line (the
“340 line”), the proposed new Vernon-to-Coolidge 345 kV line (the “360 line”), and to the
proposed Newfane Loop 345 kV line, since they are at voltages above the 200 kV threshold.
Disorda pf. at 9-10.
799.
Under the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005, NERC is empowered to impose
economic fines for non-compliance with the NERC Standard of up to $1 million/day. The
assignment of a “high” Violation Risk Factor to a violation of the NERC Vegetation
Management Reliability Standard confirms that NERC expects transmission owners to take
vegetation management programs very seriously, and that any violation could result in serious
penalties. Id. at 10.
800.
NERC recently issued penalties to three utilities totaling $255,000 for violations
of the NERC Vegetation Management Reliability Standards. Disorda reb. pf. at 13; Exhibit
Petitioners Reb. JD-3.
801.
ISO-NE recently adopted a regional transmission vegetation management
standard, ISO-NE Operating Procedure (“OP”) 3, Appendix C - ISO New England Right-of-Way
Vegetation Management Standard (February 1, 2005). Disorda pf. at 11; Exhibit Petitioners JD6.
802.
The OP3 Standard applies to transmission voltages of 69 kV and above, and
therefore applies to all VELCO ROWs. Disorda pf. at 11-12.
- 140 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 141 of 162
803.
VELCO’s TVMP has been developed to meet the requirements of the NERC and
ISO-NE transmission vegetation management standards. In addition, VELCO consulted the
American National Standards Institute (“ANSI”) Standard A300 – Standard Practices for Tree,
Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance (Integrated Vegetation Management - Electric
Utility Rights-of-Way). Id. at 12; Exhibit Petitioners JD-7.
804.
The goal of VELCO’s TVMP is to prevent physical contact between transmission
lines and nearby vegetation that could cause a transmission line to fail. Disorda pf. at 13.
805.
In accordance with the NERC and ISO-NE standards, VELCO’s TVMP includes
minimum clearances and an approach to vegetation management intended to preserve those
clearances. Id.
806.
VELCO utilizes a system of vegetation management that manages plant
communities in which compatible and incompatible vegetation are identified, action thresholds
are considered, control methods are evaluated, and selected control(s) are implemented. Id.
807.
Choice of control methods is based on safety, environmental impact,
effectiveness, site characteristics, security, and economics. This system of vegetation
management is called Integrated Vegetation Management, a concept recommended in the ANSI
Standard. Id. at 13-14; see Exhibit Petitioners JD-7.
808.
VELCO has established a four year vegetation management cycle as an action
threshold. This vegetation management cycle has been time tested since 1980, and is based upon
engineering design of the lines, the growth rate potential of the vegetation, and required
minimum vegetation to conductor clearances. Disorda pf. at 14.
809.
The primary clearance factor is the design of the line. For 345 kV line corridors,
such as those involved with the Southern Loop Project, conductor to vegetation clearance
requirement at time of clearing and maintenance, is 12 feet, with a maximum safe tree height of
12 feet. Id.
810.
Vegetation that generally may mature to greater than 12 feet in height is
considered incompatible and removed from the corridor. The 12 foot maximum vegetation
height limitation is established based upon growth rates, and the fact that once exceeded,
- 141 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 142 of 162
vegetation will encroach into the conductor-vegetation clearance zone before the next clearing
cycle, thus posing a risk of vegetation to conductor contact. Id.
811.
The wire zone is the area under the conductors and extends to fifteen feet beyond
the outside conductor. All tall-growing, incompatible species are eliminated in both the wire
zone and the border zone. Id. at 15.
812.
The type of compatible vegetation permitted within the border zone includes
vegetation that does not normally mature to greater than 12 feet tall, but could exceed 12 feet in
height. Any trees that grow taller than 12 feet within the border zone are removed on the next
cycle. Id.
813.
Vegetation allowed within the wire zone does not mature to greater than 12 feet.
Over time, the plant community (trees, shrubs, forbs, ferns and grasses) retained within the ROW
stabilizes into a very low maintenance condition of compatible species. Id.
814.
Tree clearing is typically performed by VELCO-approved vegetation
management contractors using chainsaws. On large tracts such as the Southern Loop Project,
trees are cleared with mechanical, specialized tree-clearing equipment. Trees are cut as close as
possible to grade (e.g., typically six inches or less), and the stumps are left intact, as this
minimizes ground/soil disturbance and promotes soil stability. In some cases, VELCO will
remove stumps that are located within access roads, in the immediate vicinity of structure
locations, within proposed excavation areas, or based upon other construction-specific needs. Id.
at 16.
815.
Use of herbicides is an integral part of VELCO’s TVMP. Id.
816.
VELCO has obtained a Permit to Conduct Rights of Way Herbicide Treatment
from the Agency of Agriculture. Id. at 16; see Exhibit Petitioners JD-8.
817.
Continued use of selective herbicide applications is an appropriate best
management practice, as there is no evidence that herbicides adversely impact rare plants in
utility corridors, and in fact may be beneficial to rare and other plant and animal species.
Disorda reb. pf. at 3.
- 142 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 143 of 162
818.
The TVMP cites to studies that support the use of herbicides in utility ROWs as
an environmentally sound vegetation management technique that is beneficial to wildlife and
plant species. See Disorda pf. at 17; see also Disorda reb. pf. at 3; Exhibit Petitioners JD-2 at 8
(citing Study of the Impacts of Vegetation Management Techniques on Wetlands for Utility
Rights-of-Way in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Environmental Consultants, Inc., June
1989, p. ES-6.)
819.
The Massachusetts study concerning the use of ROW management techniques,
including the use of herbicides to control undesirable vegetation in wetlands, concluded that
there is no significant impact to wetlands from vegetation management techniques, and that
mechanical treatments result in relatively higher impacts than selective herbicide use because
they involve more disturbance and can leave residues from petroleum products such as bar and
chain oil. Disorda pf. at 18; Disorda reb. pf. at 3; see Exhibit Petitioners JD-10.
820.
Many wetland species are low growing and are desirable species. By removing
the undesirable species through the use of selective herbicide treatments the desirable species can
out compete undesirable species which reduces need for additional vegetation management
during subsequent cycles. Disorda pf. at 18.
821.
Another well known 50-year research study of vegetation development and
production of wildlife cover on a transmission ROW in Pennsylvania reported that “several
important habitat changes that are considered favorable to wildlife were caused by the
construction of the ROW and its subsequent maintenance with herbicide sprays.” Disorda pf. at
18-19; Exhibit Petitioners JD-12 at 6; see also Exhibit Petitioners JD-11 to JD-13.
822.
Selective herbicide applications are also an effective means of controlling
invasive species within utility corridors. Disorda reb. pf. at 3; see Exhibit Petitioners Reb. JD-1.
823.
VELCO’s TVMP strives to have an approach to vegetation management that
supports and enhances wildlife habitat. Disorda pf. at 20.
824.
Habitat values for areas of the sprayed ROW were much higher than the adjoining
forest or even as compared to wildlife clearing in adjacent state gamelands. Disorda reb. pf. at 3;
Exhibit Petitioners JD-12 at 6.
- 143 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 144 of 162
825.
General observations on VELCO rights-of-way indicate a noticeable bio-diversity
that provides very favorable habitat for many wildlife species. Disorda pf. at 20.
826.
Utility ROWs promote low growing desirable vegetation that is maintained in a
stable early successional habitat that is disappearing throughout Vermont as farms are abandoned
and developed. By managing for early successional habitat, the ROW supports and promotes
wildlife habitat improvement. Id.
827.
According to ANR witness Popp “[a] number of R,T,E plants in Vermont are rare
because they are at the edges of their range. Because these species are struggling to survive on
the edge of their preferred habitat they typically require environments that are regularly
disturbed. Powerline ROWs as well as some other more naturally disturbed environments fill
this requirement.” Disorda reb. pf at 4; see Exhibit Petitioners Reb. SPD/BC/JS-3.
828.
Indeed, some of the rare species identified on the Southern Loop ROW, such as
Greene’s rush and Grassleaf rush (Juncus marginatus) are located in previously disturbed areas
(i.e., along the in-corridor access roads) where these species, as a result of their propagation
ecology, colonized in the ROW and other disturbed areas such as roadside ditches. Disorda reb.
pf. at 4.
829.
It is anticipated that, as a result of this Project and the creation of early
successional habitat, other opportunistic rare species may colonize into the expanded corridor.
Id.
830.
Promoting stable plant communities on the ROW allows strong, healthy root-mat
conditions that are effective in stabilizing soil and controlling erosion. VELCO’s TVMP
addresses erosion control by encouraging compatible plants such as: ferns and grasses, sweetfern, blueberries, blackberries, raspberries, dogwood and other low-growing shrubs as well as a
variety of wild flowers. Disorda pf. at 19.
831.
In areas where incompatible species dominate the right of way, erosion controls
may be more of a concern. However, in these areas the strong root-mat conditions of the
incompatible species are typically effective in controlling erosion until either compatible species
begin to grow in or incompatible species re-sprout. Id. at 19-20.
- 144 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 145 of 162
832.
The best approach to managing rare plants and natural communities is the
collaborative development of a comprehensive management plan, detailing utility corridor best
management practices (“BMPs”) to be implemented in and around these resources. Disorda reb.
pf. at 2
833.
At the April 16, 2008, meeting of the Vermont Pesticide Advisory Council
(“VPAC”), VPAC “unanimously approved a motion of the utilities to work with ANR to develop
a comprehensive plan to address rare, threatened, and endangered species in their ROWs. VPAC
specifically requested the parties to report back to them by late fall as to our progress.” See
Exhibit Petititioners Reb. JD-2 (A.PET:ANR.1-35).
834.
The Petitioners are developing a comprehensive management plan together with
ANR. The Petitioners and ANR, along with other stakeholders, will work collaboratively to
develop a uniform set of BMPs for integrated vegetation management of electric utility corridors,
including the use of selective herbicides. Disorda reb. pf. at 2; Exhibit Stipulation 1 at 5.
835.
The Petitioners and ANR have agreed to use their best efforts to assist the
collaborative to establish a consensus set of BMPs by June, 2009. Id.
836.
The Petitioners and ANR agree that no specific restrictions as to herbicide use
associated with the Project shall be proposed or implemented, except as determined by an
agreement among the collaborative or as otherwise already set forth in VELCO’s TVMP. Id.
Electromagnetic Fields (“EMF”)
837.
The electric and magnetic fields produced by the proposed Project will not have
an undue adverse effect on the public health or safety. This finding is supported by findings 838
through 855, below. See also In re: Northwest Vt. Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860, Order of
1/28/05 at 62-78.
838.
All matter contains electrically-charged particles. Each electric charge generates
an electric field that exerts force on other nearby charges. That is, the electric field is a measure
of force-per-unit-charge and is usually expressed in units of volts per meter (V/m). Valberg pf.
at 5-6.
- 145 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 146 of 162
839.
When electric charges move, an electric current exists, and the electric current
generates a magnetic field. Valberg pf. at 6.
840.
Everyone is exposed to a wide variety of man-made electric and magnetic fields.
Id. at 7.
841.
Man-made magnetic fields are common in everyday life. Many childhood toys
contain magnets. “Permanent magnets” generate strong, steady magnetic fields. Typical toy
magnets (e.g., “refrigerator-door” magnets) produce 100,000 – 500,000 milligauss (“mG”). Id.
842.
The earth’s atmosphere produces slowly varying electric fields (about 100 to
10,000 V/m) that occasionally discharge dramatically, as lightning strikes. Also, magnetic fields
are produced by the earth’s core, and can be easily demonstrated with a compass needle. The
size of the earth’s magnetic field in the Northeast U.S. is about 570 mG. Id. at 8.
843.
Electric power transmission lines, distribution lines, and the electric wiring in
buildings carry AC currents and voltages that change size and direction at a frequency of 60-Hz.
These 60-Hz currents and voltages produce 60-Hz EMF. The size of the magnetic field is
proportional to the current, and the size of the electric field is proportional to the voltage. Id.
844.
The earth’s steady EMF do not have the 60-cycles-per-second (60-Hz) time
variation characteristic of power-line EMF, but are otherwise indistinguishable. For example, a
magnet spinning at 60 cycles per second will produce a magnetic field indistinguishable from the
magnetic fields produced by an appropriate magnitude of 60-Hz power-line current. Id.
845.
The EMF produced by transmission lines, electrical wires, and electrical
equipment decrease rapidly as the distance away from the source increases. Id.
846.
Inside residences, typical baseline 60-Hz magnetic fields (away from appliances)
range from 0.5 to 2.0 mG. EMF inside the home arise from electric appliances, outdoor
distribution wiring, indoor wiring, and grounding currents. Id. at 8-9.
847.
Higher magnetic field levels are found near operating appliances. For example,
can openers, mixers, blenders, refrigerators, fluorescent lamps, electric ranges, clothes washers,
toasters, portable heaters, vacuum cleaners, electric tools, and many other appliances produce
- 146 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 147 of 162
magnetic fields of size 40 – 300 mG at distances of 1 foot.28 Magnetic fields from personal-care
appliances held within ½ of a foot (e.g., shavers, hair dryers, massagers) can produce 600-700
mG. In the school and work environment, copy machines, vending machines, video-display
terminals, electric tools, lights and motors are all sources of significant power-line magnetic
fields. Id. at 9.
848.
Evidence available from scientific research on EMF and from human experience
with EMF exposures does not establish that typical levels of power-line EMF are hazardous to
health. Id. at 10.
849.
Thousands of studies have now examined the hypothesis that power-line EMF
exposure can lead to biological effects, and potentially, adverse health impacts. Out of this vast
number, some studies have reported results that could be interpreted as suggestive of power-line
EMF being hazardous to human health. However, it has not been possible to determine if these
results truly reflect a consistent and causal role for EMF in the health endpoints studied or
whether they represent statistical fluctuations and/or non-causal factors, such as might be
expected in any series of observed correlations. Id. at 36.
850.
Some of the most important work has been done under the auspices of the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (“NIEHS”). NIEHS had a program called
“EMF RAPID” that funded laboratory research to determine what, if any, aspects of EMF
interaction with biological systems has the potential to express themselves as adverse disease
outcomes. The conclusion of this research program is summarized by NIEHS as follows:
The NIEHS believes that the probability that ELF-EMF exposure is truly a health
hazard is currently small. The weak epidemiological associations and lack of any
laboratory support for these associations provide only marginal, scientific support
that exposure to this agent is causing any degree of harm. (p. 52 of the June 2002
NIEHS booklet “EMF Questions and Answers”)
Id. at 12.
28 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated with the Use of
Electric Power, Questions and Answers, NIH Publication 02-4493 (2002), Research Triangle Park, NC,
available at http://www.niehs.nih.gov/emfrapid/booklet/home.htm.
- 147 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 148 of 162
851.
In spite of many years of diligent work, no firm evidence of adverse EMF effects
has been found in the laboratory for any of these measures of EMF exposure. Id. at 20.
852.
At this point in time, a large volume of research and analysis on the question of
EMF health effects has been generated, representing the accumulation of many years of
laboratory work and many years of human experience with EMF. The scientific data on EMF
and health have been assembled and reviewed by many independent scientific consensus groups
of research and public-health experts. These groups and agencies include the World Health
Organization, the National Radiation Protection Board (UK), the National Academy of Sciences,
the American Medical Association, the American Physical Society (the professional society for
American physicists), the American Cancer Society, the Swedish National Health and Welfare
Board, and others. These “blue-ribbon” panels do not conclude that EMFs from electric-power
transmission lines are unsafe for nearby residents and the public. The reports of these groups are
voluminous, thorough, and even-handed. Id. at 21.
853.
The United States has no federal standards limiting occupational or residential
exposure to 60-Hz EMF. Id. at 28.
854.
In comparison to international, national and state standards and guidelines that
exist, the calculated EMF levels (both the maximum levels and at the ROW edge) for the Project,
are considerably below what is permissible within the guidelines, for public locations.
Moreover, in terms of magnetic fields (the component of EMF that has been subject to the
greatest scrutiny), the maximum levels caused by the Project are quite modest. Id. at 35.
855.
The Vermont Department of Health (“DOH”) has evaluated the potential health
effects of the proposed Southern Loop Project with respect to EMF exposure. DOH observes
that the current body of literature is insufficient to establish a direct cause and effect relationship
between EMF exposure and adverse health effects, and concludes that there are no compelling
health concerns or reasons requiring modification to the proposed Project. Exhibit DPS-VPH-2
at 10.
- 148 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 149 of 162
DISCUSSION
The evidence presented in this docket leads us to conclude that there will be no undue
adverse health effects from EMF as a result of the Project. We recognize that there is concern
about the effects of EMF but the analyses by public health agencies show no clear health effects
and at best point to EMF as a potential, but uncertain, risk. It is for this reason that NIEHS and
IARC have not classified EMF as “carcinogenic” or “probably carcinogenic.” However, some
studies have indicated that there is a weak correlation between EMF and childhood leukemia.
This uncertainty has led the NIEHS and IARC to classify EMF as “possibly carcinogenic,” the
same category that includes coffee and pickled vegetables. See In re: Northwest Vermont
Reliability Project, Docket 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 72. The Board has previously found that:
the electric and magnetic fields (“EMF”) that will result from the
proposed Project are very unlikely to have an undue adverse effect
on public health. It is not possible to state unequivocally that there
will be no adverse health effects. Some epidemiological studies
have found a weak correlation between EMF and childhood
leukemia, despite the fact that no mechanism of causation has been
found. 29
We do not completely discount the potential health risks of EMF. However, we place
these potential risks in the context of the risks that people in a technological society face daily.
Every-day activities such as walking across a street or simply driving a car present health risks.
The possible risk from low-level EMF is simply one more risk that people incur by living in a
society that is heavily dependant on electricity.
It is also important to note that transmission lines are not the only, or even primary,
source of EMF exposure for most people. As we have noted, we receive significant, albeit short
in duration, EMF exposure from household and work-place electronic devices. Such exposures
are typically higher than those experienced at the edge of the transmission line right-of-way at
maximum continuous loading.
29 In re: Northwest Vermont Reliability Project, Docket 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 62.
- 149 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 150 of 162
The Board specifically declined to set standards for EMF exposure or adopt the
guidelines established by other states, and instead adopted a policy of prudent avoidance. The
Board identified several definitions of prudent avoidance, including the following:
[A]doption of policies that limit magnetic field exposure whenever
this can be done for a small investment of money and effort.
Prudent avoidance argues that a sufficient basis for concern does
exist but not enough is presently known to justify large
investments for avoiding magnetic field exposure. Under this
approach, large expenditures would not be made until research
provides a clearer picture of the existence and magnitude of the
risks involved.30
The Board further examined what would constitute low-cost investment with respect to prudent
avoidance and found some general guidance from a decision by the California Public Utilities
Commission. In response to the scientific uncertainty surrounding EMF, the California
Public Utilities Commission required utilities to undertake low-cost mitigation measures. The
California Commission defined “low-cost” as:
in the range of 4% of the total project cost but specified that this
4% benchmark is not an absolute cap. [The Commission] found
that, to be implemented, a mitigation measure should achieve some
noticeable reduction in EMF but declined to adopt a specific goal
for EMF reduction.31
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission, in a recent order, describes mitigation
techniques such as increasing line clearance and careful line configuration as falling within the
parameters of prudent avoidance.
As the Board found in Docket 6860, the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences does provide some specific guidance as to recommended regulatory action in response
to current knowledge of EMF risk:
The NIEHS suggest that the level and strength of evidence
supporting ... EMF exposure as a human health hazard are
30 In re: Northwest Vermont Reliability Project, Docket 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 74 citing the Department's 1994
Twenty-Year Electric Plan at 5-12.
31 236 P.U.R. 4th 406 (Cal. P.U.C., August 19, 2004).
- 150 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 151 of 162
insufficient to warrant aggressive regulatory actions; thus, we do
not recommend actions such as stringent standards on electric
appliances and a national program to bury all transmission and
distribution lines. Instead, the evidence suggests passive measures
such as continued emphasis on educating both the public and the
regulated community on means aimed at reducing exposures.
NIEHS suggests that the power industry continue its current
practice of siting power lines to reduce exposures and continue to
explore ways to reduce the creation of magnetic fields around
transmission and distribution lines without creating new hazards.32
Based upon the recommendations of the NIEHS, the Board finds that the policy of
prudent avoidance does not require a generic policy of placing transmission lines underground to
avoid EMF exposure. The Project passes by very few residences and no party has asked that any
portion be placed underground, and we will not require VELCO to place underground any
portion of the Project based upon the health effects of EMF. The weak evidence that EMF may
pose a health risk is insufficient to require drastic regulatory action such as placing the upgraded
transmission lines underground. Any such action would be based upon fear rather than
knowledge and would have an unjustified impact on ratepayers.
Least-Cost Integrated Resource Plan [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(6)]
856.
Although VELCO is not required to have an integrated resource plan, it is
required to plan its transmission system in accordance with the June 20, 2007 Board-approved
Docket No. 7081 Memorandum of Understanding. The Docket 7081 MOU sets forth a process
that facilitates least-cost integrated resource planning for Vermont’s transmission system.
Investigation into Least-Cost Integrated Resource Planning for Vermont Electric Power
Company, Inc.’s Transmission Plan, Docket No. 7081, Order of 6/20/07 at 3; Lamont pf. at 12.
857.
The Project was identified in the 2006 Long Range Transmission Plan Analysis as
the most significant problem on the system. As a result, VELCO and the other signatories to the
32 In re: Northwest Vermont Reliability Project, Docket 6860, Order of 1/28/05 at 75 (citing Exhibit VELCO Cross
DelPizzo-8 at 37-38).
- 151 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 152 of 162
Docket 7081 MOU identified the Southern Loop Project as part of the transition plan set forth in
the MOU. LaForest pf. at 14.
858.
We find that this Project provides the most cost-effective and least cost solution to
meet the needs of the system. Lamont pf. at 12.
859.
Even under the most optimistic and aggressive assumptions regarding generation,
DR, and efficiency, the net load cannot be reduced to a point of cost-effectively avoiding or
deferring the Project. Id. at 3.
860.
With regard to the installed cost of the transmission equipment, this is a least-cost
solution. The substation and line configurations proposed by VELCO meet NEPOOL’s
reliability standards without “over-design” or “gold plating.” Smith pf. at 20.
861.
These designs are consistent with those used in the rest of New England to avoid
multiple outages due to single equipment failures such as “stuck breakers” or bus faults. Id.
862.
This level of contingency design is consistent with practices across northeastern
United States and within the NPCC region. Id.
863.
The Project is consistent with the principles for resource selection expressed in
CVPS’s Integrated Resource Plan (“IRP”).33 Jones/Kirby pf. at 27.
864.
CVPS seeks to improve reliability and efficiency as outlined in its IRP. Id.; see
also Exhibit Petitioners KJ/LK-4.
865.
Central Vermont’s least-cost planning study conducted in support of the Project is
an assessment of the economic impacts of the Project. Jones/Kirby reb. pf. at 6.
866.
The Project elements designed to solve the local reliability problem had the
lowest twenty-year New England societal costs of the solution options providing full
effectiveness for the five root problems assessed by CVPS. Id.
867.
These Project elements also had the lowest Vermont customer societal cost. Id.
33 The Southern Loop ASC was recognized in Central Vermont’s approved 2003 IRP. See Docket No. 6854, Order
of 4/16/05.
- 152 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 153 of 162
868.
Growing electric demand in the CVPS target area has been addressed by two
principal means: (1) the installation of switched shunt capacitors along the loop to prop up its
voltage; and (2) the use of DSM to ease the system’s burden. Jones/Kirby pf. at 8.
869.
These DSM measures have included interruptible contracts for the ski resorts,
end-use fuel switching, load control, and conservation and efficiency programs. Id.
870.
Additionally, a second 115/46 kV transformer was added at the Woodford Road
Substation in Bennington in 1995 in order to provide redundancy and to share the demand with
the original transformer, which was becoming vulnerable to overload for some contingencies.
Id.
871.
The two main strategies for managing demand growth in the CVPS target area
have run their course and are now becoming ineffective at managing further growth solely by
themselves. Id.
872.
Compliance with Electric Energy Plan
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(7)]
The Project complies with the Electric Energy Plan approved by the Department
under 30 V.S.A. § 202. This finding is supported by findings 873 through 886, below.
873.
The Project meets the intent of the Department’s 2005 Electric Energy Plan (the
“Plan”), particularly in that it improves reliability to an appropriate level. Tr. 10/28/08 at 25-26
(Lamont).
874.
The Plan describes the following overarching policy objectives:
Modern society has come to depend on reliable electricity as an essential
resource for national security, health and welfare, communications,
finance, transportation, food and water supply, heating, cooling, lighting;
computers and electronics; commercial enterprise; and even entertainment
and leisure. In short, nearly all aspects of modern life are driven by
electricity. Customers have grown to expect that electricity will almost
always be available when needed at the flick of a switch. Most customers
have also experienced local outages …. What is not expected is the
occurrence of a massive outage on a calm, warm day. Widespread
electrical outages, such as the one that occurred on August 14, 2003, are
rare, but they can happen if multiple reliability safeguards break down.
Such outages, in turn, produce considerable economic losses.
- 153 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 154 of 162
LaForest/Diebold pf at 57-58 (quoting the Plan at page 7-1).
875.
The Plan states:
Drawing from the State Energy Policy, the Plan establishes as a
benchmark that, “... to the greatest extent practicable, … Vermont can
meet its energy service needs in a manner that is adequate, reliable,
secure and sustainable; that assures affordability and encourages the
state’s economic vitality, the efficient use of energy resources and cost
effective demand side management; and that is environmentally sound
….
Id. (quoting the Plan at page 1-5).
876.
The Plan also recognizes the critical importance of an adequate and reliable
transmission and distribution infrastructure as a means of handling peak demand:
To meet peak demands … not only must utilities secure sufficient electric
supplies to meet peak demands, they must be able to distribute them to
customers over the network of transmission and distribution lines that
cross the state. Therefore, Vermont’s poles and wires network must be
large enough to handle all of the electricity demanded.
Id. at 58 (quoting the Plan at page 3-6).
877.
The Project is being proposed because it is essential to ensure adequate and
reliable service sufficient to meet the electric demand of Vermont’s business and residents as the
state economy grows and expands. Id.
878.
The Plan devotes considerable attention, for example at page 7-4, to avoiding an
event such as the August 2003 regional blackout. This Project is designed to avoid or reduce the
chance of outages. Id.
879.
The term “affordable” is expressed in the Plan in terms of ensuring that
consumers are provided with electric service “at the least total cost to society.”
Id. (quoting Plan at 1-6).
880.
The economics of the Project have been evaluated applying the societal cost test
and other cost tests and considerations approved by the Board in Docket No. 7081. Id. at 58-59.
881.
Over 90% of the Project’s total cost is eligible for regional cost treatment as pool
transmission facility, which VELCO considers to be likely. This eligibility and likely
- 154 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 155 of 162
designation will substantially reduce the cost of the transmission line and substation upgrades to
Vermonters. Id. at 59.
882.
The term “efficient” in the Plan references a general need to adequately explore
and compare the Project to DSM, load response, and other potential energy efficiency solutions.
Petitioners have done this. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 59; Jones/Kirby pf. at 29.
883.
The Project is also “efficient” in the traditional sense, because it maximizes the
use of existing utility corridors to provide adequate, reliable energy to Vermont, without
requiring major expenditures associated with creating new routes or acquiring new rights of way.
It is also “efficient” in that it will reduce total system losses thereby raising the ratio of energy
delivered divided by energy transmitted. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 59.
884.
The term “safe” as used in the Plan takes into consideration the protection of
public health and safety as part of planning. The Plan specifically recommends (at page 7-35)
using the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (“ICNIRP”)
guidelines as the standard for measuring EMF from transmission upgrade projects.34 Id. at 60.
885.
As shown in Dr. Peter Valberg’s report, the EMF levels on the 345 kV segments
are projected to be substantially lower than the levels considered “unsafe” in the ICNIRP
guidelines. Id.; Valberg pf. at 35.
886.
Concerning the “environmental soundness”, the findings above demonstrate that
the Project will not have an undue adverse impact. LaForest/Diebold pf. at 60; see generally
Exhibit Petitioners SD-2; see findings 486 through 855, above.
34 See also Jones/Kirby pf. at 34 explaining that the proposed transmission facilities will be built to comply with all
applicable civil and electrical engineering standards for conductor clearances, insulation strength, structural
integrity, safety barriers, and the like. Furthermore, the improved short-circuit strength afforded by the synchronous
condensers and the new Newfane interconnection would improve local relay coordination and help to minimize
fault-clearing durations on the CVPS Southern Loop subtransmission and Brattleboro subtransmission systems.
Finally, the enhancement of system reliability provides its own measure of added safety by avoiding the failure of
critical infrastructure such as traffic lights, medical equipment, and other devices vital to public health and safety.
Id.
- 155 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 156 of 162
DISCUSSION
We conclude that the proposed Project is consistent with the Plan. This conclusion is
based upon the foregoing findings of fact, including those incorporated from other relevant
sections of this Proposal for Decision. As noted by this Board in its order approving the
Northwest Vermont Reliability Project, “the overriding goals in the . . . Plan ‘to meet Vermont’s
electric needs in a manner that is efficient, adequate, reliable, secure, sustainable, affordable, safe
and environmentally sound,’ reflect the very factors that we evaluate under the various
provisions of Section 248(b).” In re: Northwest Vermont Reliability Project, Docket No. 6860,
Order of 1/28/05 at 210, fn. 211. We further conclude that, because the Project is required to
meet a present and future need for reliable electric service, and is the most cost-effective option
for doing so, even if the Project were determined not to be in compliance with the Plan, there
would be ample good cause to approve it.
Outstanding Resource Waters [30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(8)]
887.
The Project does not affect any segment of the state’s waters that have been
designated as outstanding resource waters. Exhibit Petitioners SD-2 at 6.
Existing Transmission Facilities
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(10)]
888.
The proposed Project can be served economically by existing or planned
transmission facilities without undue adverse effect on Vermont utilities or customers. This
finding is supported by findings 889 through 890, below.
889.
The existing transmission and subtransmission network serving the region and
southern Vermont is not capable of reliably meeting Vermont’s existing and future electrical
needs. Findings 268 through 329, above.
890.
The primary purpose of the proposed Project is to improve the reliability and
adequacy of the existing transmission facilities serving Vermont. Findings 330-345.
- 156 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 157 of 162
IV.
CONCLUSION
After a rigorous examination of the evidentiary record and analysis of the legal
arguments put forth by parties in this Docket, we are convinced that the proposed Project is
needed today to solve serious regional and local transmission system reliability deficiencies, that
this Project is the best solution to solve those problems, and that it can be constructed without
undue adverse impacts upon Vermont’s natural and built environment, and without presenting a
risk to Vermonters’ health and safety.
Unlike the recent Northwest Vermont Reliability Project, Petitioners in this case have
presented final design detail plans, have completed or nearly completed all critical environmental
review and permit applications, and have engaged in both an extensive public outreach process
and collaborative efforts with other parties, including local communities and the affected
permitting agencies. As compared to the forty-plus days of technical hearings in the Northwest
Vermont Reliability Project, we had less than two days of hearings in this case. We recognize
and appreciate these efforts undertaken on behalf of all of the parties, and believe that they have
been instrumental in producing an efficient and positive result.
We conclude and find that the proposed Project will promote the general good of the state
with the conditions that we have included in this Order.
To the extent the findings in this Order are inconsistent with any proposed findings, such
findings are denied.
- 157 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 158 of 162
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Public Service Board
of the State of Vermont (“Board”) that:
1.
The proposed Project, in accordance with the evidence and plans submitted in this
proceeding, will promote the general good of the State of Vermont in accordance with 30 V.S.A.
§ 248, and a certificate of public good to that effect shall be issued with the conditions set forth
in paragraphs 2 through 5 below.
2.
Prior to proceeding with construction, Petitioners shall file, for the Board’s
approval, final construction plans for the Project’s Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line, the
Newfane Loop and the substation upgrades, which Project plans shall conform substantially to
the Project plans approved by the Order.
3.
Prior to proceeding with construction, Petitioners shall obtain all necessary
permits and approvals. Construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Project shall be
in accordance with such permits and approvals.
4.
Petitioners shall conduct pre-and post-construction noise measurements at all
substations and file the results with the Board and the parties.
5.
Petitioners shall file with the Board and parties to this docket a copy of the End of
Field (“EOF”) Letter being delivered to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
6.
The agreements referenced below are approved in their entirety, and are hereby
incorporated into this Order:
(a)
Memorandum of Understanding dated September 2, 2008 among the Petitioners
and the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources with associated attachments; and
(b)
Memorandum of Understanding dated October 13, 2008, among the Petitioners
and the Vermont Department of Public Service, with the Memorandum from Michael
Buscher to David Raphael dated October 23, 2008 (revised 10/28/08).
6.
Construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Project shall be in
accordance with the findings and requirements set forth in this Order.
- 158 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 159 of 162
Dated at Montpelier, Vermont, this 29th day of December, 2008.
_______________________)
) PUBLIC SERVICE
)
_______________________)
BOARD
)
) OF VERMONT
_______________________)
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
FILED:__________________
ATTEST:________________
Clerk of the Board
- 159 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 160 of 162
Docket No. 7373
Petition of Vermont Transco, LLC, and
Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc.
(collectively, “VELCO”), and Central Vermont
Public Service Corporation (“CVPS”) for a
Certificate of Public Good, pursuant to 30
V.S.A. § 248, for the “Southern Loop Project,”
located in Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro,
Dummerston, Newfane, Brookline, Townshend,
Grafton, Windham, Andover, Chester, Ludlow
and Cavendish, Vermont, consisting of the
following elements: (1) a new, approximately
51-mile, 345 kV transmission line between
Vernon-Cavendish, to be built parallel to and
within the same utility right-of-way as
VELCO’s existing Vernon-Cavendish 345 kV
line; (2) a new VELCO 345/115 kV Vernon
substation, to be located just north of the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; (3) a
new 345/115/46 kV Newfane substation; (4) a
new, approximately one-mile, 345 kV
transmission line loop between the new
Newfane substation and the new VernonCavendish 345 kV line; (5) expansion of
VELCO’s Coolidge substation in Cavendish,
Vermont; and (6) the implementing of
incremental energy efficiency to defer
transmission upgrades in Southern Vermont
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Entered: 12/29/08
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC GOOD ISSUED
PURSUANT TO 30 V.S.A § 248
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the Public Service Board of the State of Vermont
(“Board”) this day found and adjudged that the construction of the proposed Southern Loop
Project, described in the Board’s December 29, 2008 Order in this Docket (the “Order”), will
promote the general good of the State of Vermont, and a Certificate of Public Good is hereby
issued to Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. and Vermont Transco, LLC (collectively
- 160 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 161 of 162
“VELCO”) and Central Vermont Public Service Corporation (“CVPS”)(collectively with
VELCO, the “Petitioners”), subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to proceeding with construction, Petitioners shall file, for the Board’s approval,
final construction plans for the Project’s Vernon-to-Cavendish 345 kV line, the
Newfane Loop and the substation upgrades, which Project plans shall conform
substantially to the Project plans approved by the Order.
2. Prior to proceeding with construction, Petitioners shall obtain all necessary permits
and approvals. Construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Project shall
be in accordance with such permits and approvals.
3. Petitioners shall conduct pre-and post-construction noise measurements at all
substations and file the results with the Board and the parties.
4. Petitioners shall file with the Board and parties to this docket a copy of the End of
Field (“EOF”) Letter being delivered to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
5. The agreements referenced below are approved in their entirety, and are hereby
incorporated into this Order:
(a)
Memorandum of Understanding dated September 2, 2008 among the
Petitioners and the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources with associated
attachments; and
(b)
Memorandum of Understanding dated October 13, 2008, among the
Petitioners and the Vermont Department of Public Service, with the
Memorandum from Michael Buscher to David Raphael dated October 23,
2008 (revised 10/28/08).
6. Construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed Project shall be in
accordance with the findings and requirements set forth in the Order.
7. This Certificate of Public Good shall not be transferred without prior approval of the
Board.
- 161 -
Southern Loop Project
PSB Docket No. 7373
Joint Proposal for Decision
December 3, 2008
Page 162 of 162
DATED at Montpelier, Vermont, this 29th day of December, 2009.
_______________________)
) PUBLIC SERVICE
)
_______________________)
BOARD
)
) OF VERMONT
_______________________)
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
FILED:__________________
ATTEST:________________
Clerk of the Board
- 162 -