Behind the Meter: An MPSC Podcast – Transmission Line Siting In Michigan

Discover how the Michigan Public Service Commission is strengthening public input and increasing flexibility in the routing of major electric transmission projects in the latest episode of Behind the Meter.
 
In this episode, Commissioners break down what transmission lines are, the MPSC’s authority in the siting process, and why Michigan is experiencing an increase in transmission cases. Tune in for a look at the evolving landscape of transmission planning and the Commission’s efforts to ensure transparency and community engagement remain at the heart of the process.

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:16

Hello and welcome to Behind the Meter, an MPSC podcast, where we look at the people, policies, and technologies shaping Michigan's energy and telecommunications landscape. I'm your host, Mike Byrne. Today we have an episode about a really important and timely topic: the sighting of electric transmission lines in Michigan. I am joined once again by all three members of the Michigan Public Service Commission, Chair Dan Scripps, Commissioner Catherine Paritic, and Commissioner Shaquila Myers. Hello to all of you.

unknown 0:46

Hello.

SPEAKER_02 0:47

We're also really excited to have a special guest with us today, a landowner who recently participated in a transmission line sighting case at the MPSC and subsequently provided insights to help make the process better for future cases. Ms. Valerie Wolfsheid Brennan. Hello.

SPEAKER_03 1:03

Hi, thank you for having me.

SPEAKER_02 1:05

And we're really excited to hear from you today. So thanks for thanks for being here.

SPEAKER_03 1:08

It's a pleasure.

SPEAKER_02 1:10

So let's jump right in. And maybe we should start out by talking about sort of what what are electric transmission lines? What are transmission lines and why do we need them? Commissioner Peritic, maybe I'll ask you to kick us off.

SPEAKER_04 1:21

Sure, happy to. So transmission lines are what gets the electricity from the power plants to the smaller trans distribution lines, which then get the electricity to your home. So you can kind of think of our electric system, the electric network, as broken up into two different levels. So there's the transmission level, that's the high side level. So that's kind of like the interstate highways of the of the electric system. So like they're the really big roads where you drive fast and you uh you just get from point A to point B. And then the and then once you get off the highway, you get onto the distribution system. Those are the the smaller lines, the the smaller local roads where uh where you're driving a little bit slower, there's a lot more turns, there's a lot more um uh uh uh places to uh to go and to turn off. And that's that's the the equivalent of the distribution system. So um the reason that we need these bigger interstate highways of the electric system, the transmission lines, is because power plants aren't always necessarily located close to where the uh the population centers are or where the electricity actually is going to be used. So we need that kind of faster, higher voltage way of getting those electrons to uh to where they're going to be used. Um so it's normally defined as over um like a hundred kilovolts or you know a hundred thousand volts. Um but uh the the 345 volt level will be will be important for this conversation today for reasons uh you will learn later. Um but so why why do we why do we need transmission lines? What's the what are the benefits of them? So it gets the it gets the the electric the electrons from those power plants to the population centers, right? Why do we need to do that? Why do we need to do that at the at that high level? Well, it keeps costs lower. So the higher voltage that you transmit these electrons, the cheaper it is. And that's because there's lower line losses. So there's you you actually get more power for uh for a cheaper price if you transmit at this higher voltage. Um and and also it just connects more different places. So you might be in your house when you flip your light switch on, drawing from a power plant that that uh maybe came from wind in Iowa that uh that came across one of these really high voltage transmission lines, or maybe from uh a natural gas plant in Michigan somewhere. Uh and you might be drawing from both of those different locations uh simul like simultaneously. Some of that might be coming to your house at the same time. And uh that because you're able to draw from broader locations and different resource mix, then that keeps your uh resource adequacy or like your bulk reliability higher and and your costs lower.

unknown 4:24

Great.

SPEAKER_02 4:25

So transmission lines are obviously really important, um, but to be able to actually get them built, get them sited, uh, you know, there's a process associated with that. And so we actually at the commission hadn't seen a transmission siting case in in a long time and and just had a couple uh over the course of the past year or so. So maybe Chair Scripps, could you tell us a little bit in your in your uh estimation, sort of why we're seeing this case now and and more coming?

SPEAKER_01 4:49

Yeah, I think there's a a couple drivers. So one is just the ongoing energy transition. Um we're seeing uh older power plants retire and uh new new plants being built. Sometimes they're in the same location and sometimes they're in different places. So some of it is about how to make sure that you're you're hooking things up, and then some of it is looking forward in terms of what's happening on the system. You know, you can solve problems either with generation or with transmission with transmission sometimes. And the ability as Commissioner Paritek was talking about to draw from that bigger pool uh geographically means that that you can bring in generation sources, maybe sometimes that are further out, uh, and there are advantages to that as well. And so you you've seen a couple of drivers specifically that that are, I think, raising the the interest in transmission. One here in Michigan was in in 2019, following the the polar vortex event, came really close. I mean, we were in um challenges on both the natural gas side and on the electricity side. And the governor at that point tasked the commission with developing the statewide energy assessment, um, which we did over the course of several months and issued that in September of 2019, looking at everything from propane to natural gas to electricity and and a whole suite of recommendations. But one of them was we needed to find ways to better connect ourselves to the rest of the grid and uh to increase the amount of electricity that we could import from other states and that we could export to other states. And so one of the recommendations from that statewide energy assessment was to really look at the transmission linkages between Michigan and the rest of MISO, which is the mid-continent independent system operator or the the operator of the bulk transmission grid from here to the Dakotas down to Texas, uh, and to make sure that we were better integrated as a peninsular state. There are challenges with that, uh, but but increasing those linkages gave us a little more buffer when when extreme weather events happened. And the other thing that happened at about the same time was that that MISO was engaging in what's called the long-range transmission planning process, or LRTP as it's called. Uh, and that was really looking at what does the future of the system look like as as we're electrifying things like transportation, as the resource mix is changing, and and that long-range transmission planning process ultimately identified a number of specific projects as included as as portfolios, including the two lines ultimately that that uh that came before us last year. And so it was both the the state's interest in increasing the linkages with with the rest of the the the bulk electric grid and then the the bulk electric grids planning process that was identifying some of the specific lines that that would make that possible.

SPEAKER_02 7:28

Great. And so we talked about that there were cases here at the MPSC last year, and and we expect some more to be coming uh in the in the near future. Um but it's probably helpful for for listeners to understand sort of what authority does the commission actually have when it comes to to transmission lines? And maybe Commissioner Myers will ask you to weigh in on that a little bit.

SPEAKER_00 7:48

Sure. Um the commission, I think uh it feels like very often we talk about the changes that happened in 2023 and and the commission having authority over things, but uh the authority over siting for transmission lines actually goes back to 1995. PA 30 of 1995 gave the commission mandatory siting authority for transmission lines that are more than five miles long and more than 345 kilovolts or higher, um, which Commissioner Perate mentioned earlier is an important number. Now, um, while the commission has mandatory sighting over those that match those requirements, um, less than five miles or below 345 kilovolts can come to the commission. Um, they are not required to file, but can file with us at the discretion of the developer. Act 30 cases, as we call them, um, are fully contested, legal proceedings, evidence-based, and required to be decided within one year of the application. Again, those are statutory guidelines, which you often hear us say that the the commission is a creature of statute. Um the commit the factors that the commission must weigh are the public benefits, grid reliability, environmental and landowner impacts, um, statutory requirements under the law, and whether the route is feasible and reasonable. Um and so those are the factors that we weigh when making the decision uh on on where a commission um where a transmission line will go.

SPEAKER_02 9:20

Great. And so I think you know, we we've talked about sort of the need for transmission lines uh and their importance to being able to get electricity to to customers who use it. Um but in terms of siting, it one of the the the the uh the considerations that the the commission has to make relates to the whether the route is feasible and reasonable. And that sort of impacts like the actual location and and the landowners who um who who may be impacted by this. So to bring this issue to life, we're we're joined by uh Ms. Walshide Brennan, who who did participate in in the Act 30 cases that took place last year. Um and and Val, maybe I would just ask sort of could you talk to us about how you first became involved in in these cases?

SPEAKER_03 10:06

Yeah, yeah. Um my entire family, including our historical Centennial Farm, were affected by one of the recent projects. And um the project had very limited landowner engagement. So we decided to intervene in the case hoping that our voices would be heard. Um, throughout the process, many concerns came to light. And so when the commission issued its final order, we were extremely grateful that you recognized some of the shortcomings of Public Act 30 and directed staff and interested parties to develop voluntary uh filing guidelines. Um facing condemnation was a life-changing experience for my family and many of our neighbors. Um seven generations of my family have stewarded our land since 1895. So knowing that, you know, more than 400 miles of new transmission lines may be built in Michigan, um, I felt a responsibility to um contribute comments to the new guidelines so that future landowners would have a better opportunity to be heard.

SPEAKER_02 11:26

That's that's much appreciated. Um I think that, you know, maybe I'll ask Chair Scripps if you could talk a little bit about going through the process of of uh the citing cases that were before the commission last year. Um you know, there were uh I guess what did the commission learn from that experience and sort of you know, especially as it relates to concerns that were were raised by landowners, like like Ms. Walshart Brennan.

SPEAKER_01 11:52

Yeah, so the there were two two projects. Um one was called Nelson Road to Oneida, and that was a 39-mile project, and the other was uh called Helix to Hippoly, and I think that's the one that actually crossed the Indiana border, but 55 miles, and and they connect. Um the the they were the first real projects that we'd seen in in about 15 years. I think the the last time we had one of these major cases was was right around 2011. Uh and it's the first, I think, interstate projects that we've had in in 50 years. So these, as you mentioned earlier, uncommon uh projects. But as we went through the process, and and Shaquille, or Commissioner Myers, sorry, is um uh sometimes switch between first names and and titles, um, sort of mentioned that we're a creature of statute earlier in in the show, and and that's exactly right. And so looking at sort of applying this statute uh that's been around since 1995, but we haven't had a case in in 15 years, um, we sort of worked through what it it requires. And it requires the the transmission developer, in this case, the the Michigan Electric Transmission Company or Metzi to propose both a proposed route and then at least one alternate. And and that's what we had in front of us. And what we found was that neither was perfect, and that they sort of they went through a process, but but ultimately there there were challenges and and also the ability to then so other parties can come in and and propose different routes. Um but but the challenge with that is that the people who might be impacted by by the the additional routes that that would then be proposed may never know that that their land could be affected. And as Val was talking about, these are the implications of our decisions are are real and significant, including ultimately triggering a process where where there is condemnation. And so that the the utility as a utility can then with the on the basis of our decision sort of build the land whether the landowner wants it or not. That is a significant consequence of this. And so I think it's incumbent on us to make sure we get it right. But the statute that we had doesn't isn't perfect. And I think we we saw the shortcomings in terms of that additional routes could be proposed, but the landowners affected may never know, and that you're looking between two imperfect options in front of you that have real consequences for the families that that have stewarded the this land in in your case for seven generations since 1895. And so I think one of the things that that came out of that is that that we have to apply the statute, but how can we make the process better in the future? Uh including ultimately the development of voluntary filing guidelines that are voluntary but we hope will increase the the transparency and the engagement of affected landowners uh in future transmission cases.

SPEAKER_02 14:46

Yeah. So let's maybe talk about that a little bit. When we talk about voluntary filing guidelines, we're talking about something that the the utility who is proposing these lines that that that they would um when they file the application with us would would would would do some of these things. So so yeah, let's let's talk about that a little bit. Like what did the commission do to improve the process? Maybe Commissioner Paritek, you can talk a little bit about what's what's part of those guidelines.

SPEAKER_04 15:12

Yeah, happy to. And uh Chair Scripps, you did a really nice job at laying out like what where those gaps were. The point of these filing guide voluntary filing guidelines is to try to close some of those gaps and set the expectations that we have as a commission when we go to review that application, what we expect to see from the company to be able to appropriately review that application. And so some of those gaps that that uh chair scripts, you you very well identified was the number of routes that we proposed, the ability for us to actually reasonably consider those routes, um, the landowner engagement process that uh that that Val went through, um, and just providing knowledgeable contacts at the companies as well. We saw a lot of gaps in the application that we uh that we uh um uh analyzed and ended up approving um last year. And the point of these voluntary filing guidelines is to help try to close those gaps. Now, these are going to be temporary. So it it does address all of those those issues. So try increasing the number of routes to that that we expect to be proposed, the ability to consider those routes, the ability for other parties, landowners to propose those routes, um, requiring better contact information, requiring more robust and meaningful landowner engagement as part of the process. Um and the these are, we keep saying voluntary because that's what they are right now. Now, that's just because we wanted to enact these quickly. We also have the ability to make them non-voluntary, to make them binding. And uh we will go through that process and get that kicked off soon and turn these, go through a rulemaking process to make these uh uh filing guidelines into actual rules. Um but just a little bit on the that process of developing those filing guidelines, you know, that that really came from a process both with our our staff, with many different interested parties who participate in the cases regularly, but also with contributions from landowners. And Val I know you participated very closely in that process, and thank you for that because having your frontline experience of what you went through from the other side, helping us actually develop those guidelines and make sure that they're actually going to work for the landowners on the other side of these projects was really crucial.

SPEAKER_02 17:45

And maybe, Commissioner Myers, I might ask you if if you could weigh in at all on how the new guidelines strengthen public participation.

SPEAKER_01 17:53

And it's interesting because uh sorry, as if I can jump in, because you you joined essentially right after we issued this. So, like you the I think the the last meeting before you were a commissioner was the meeting that we actually approved the lines uh and then kicked off this process. So this in some ways was was your introduction to so it welcome.

SPEAKER_00 18:15

Right. But I I think in the in the six months from when I joined to when we adopted um the the updated guidelines, it really showed how interactive the process can be and and how the commission addresses the changing landscape, right? Like there were guidelines that were in place and and there were ideas, but we hadn't approved lines in so long that things changed. And the interaction with landowners, I think, needed to be more robust and and and the commission was adaptable to that. And again, I think the participation from I think this process should be an example that landowners, constituents, the general public, the general ratepayer can be an active participant in making the process better and and making um and and really it helps all of us, right? It helps every ratepayer in the state or landowner as we go into you know future citing cases and and other cases that um that come before the the commission.

unknown 19:22

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 19:23

So, Val, you've actually lived kind of the process in terms of you know proposed wine going over your property potentially and then helping uh to inform these guidelines that we've talked about. What stands out to you? What what do you think about the guidelines?

SPEAKER_03 19:37

Yeah, I think the guidelines are a huge win for landowners in Michigan. Um they show that the commission listened and cares about ensuring residents have a reasonable opportunity to be involved in the case. Um staff clearly put a great deal of thought and effort into these guidelines in addressing the issues that were that were raised in previous cases. Um there's two things that really stand out to me. And um, the expanded public meeting process encourages real back and forth discussion between landowners and developers. And so this interaction hopefully will show more respect for private property and lead to better routing decisions. Um and then public notice is another key improvement. Um the guidelines call for clear notices with delivery tracking. And so we know then that landowners will actually receive information about projects that impact their property.

SPEAKER_02 20:42

And this is all intended to happen before the project even gets filed at the commission. That this interaction is taking place well in advance of of when a project ends up being filed and hopefully helps to inform, you know, sort of uh improved routes than than they otherwise would have been. Um so I guess at this point, I uh maybe it would be good to to talk a little bit about sort of just what's what's the takeaway for for Michigan residents and and and landowners, and and I might sort of ask everyone to to weigh in on that a little bit. Chair, we can start with you.

SPEAKER_01 21:15

Yeah, I I think I mean transmission is really important. It it expands the pool of resources that you can consider, and that ultimately can drive down costs uh in terms of how we how we keep the lights on and give us a better buffer in in actually keeping the lights on. So it's it's good for both uh cost and and the ultimate sort of pressures that I know a lot of of folks are are feeling right now, uh as well as that core objective of reliability. But that doesn't mean that every line in every location is the right location. And I think sometimes there there's a sense that that you know the folks who are charged, including the commission, with with making these determinations, just aren't listening to the people affected. And and I think the statute that we had in front of Of us wasn't perfect in that regard. And I think the process in the last two lines from from last year was so much better, Val, because of your participation and others who stepped forward and said, here are some concerns as you're evaluating this. Can we look at places where existing easements already exist, for example? And that was one of the key things that ultimately informed the decision on where the right location was, that there was an existing utility easement, and there was an opportunity to make use of that because there was a sense that the people along that route sort of at least had some notice that their their land sort of already had that running through that, as opposed to sort of staking out new territory and ultimately condemning more more properties, including yours, where where an existing easement just you know in that was relatively nearby already was there. But also how do you carry that forward and and making sure that the process ultimately allows for landowners to actually have a say and do it early enough in the process that it can make a difference?

SPEAKER_04 23:05

Yeah, really well said. You know, transmission is needed for both our bulk system reliability, but also for affordability. It does, it does contribute to our system in a meaningful way. And and we do need to expand that. Like with our system is changing, and we need to be able to have the ability to build more transmission lines. But the process needs to be right. And landowners need a real voice in that process. This is, you know, has a huge effect on the landowners who are either in the path of the transmission lines or close to the path of the transmission lines. The rules that we set and enforce really need to be fair, they need to be transparent, and they ultimately need to be enforceable, and that's exactly what we're working towards.

SPEAKER_00 23:53

I think it's really important that in contested cases, evidence matters, and having uh landowners who want their voices heard, their concerns hurt, they should intervene in cases, right? Like with the early notice, there's a process um in place where everyday people can really make a difference in in their in the process of placing transmission lines. And again, there are other siding, but in transmission cases. So I just I think the most important thing that we want to convey is that this isn't a process that you can't be an active participant in if you are affected.

SPEAKER_02 24:38

So maybe Val, I'll I'll close with you and just ask what advice you would give landowners who who might be affected by future transmission projects.

SPEAKER_03 24:45

Yeah, take action early. Um engage with your developer, um, attend the community meetings to understand the project, uh, talk with your neighbors and share information. Yeah, you may have common concerns or goals. Uh use the resources available from the commission. The commission has an entire website dedicated to Act 30 cases, um, along with issue briefs and podcasts like this that explain the process. Um it's helpful to seek professional advice so you understand your options and the risks. Um and then my last very important point is that public comments alone are not evidence in a contested case. So if you want your concerns formally considered by the commission and in their decision, you need to intervene in the case and provide evidence.

SPEAKER_01 25:44

Yeah, it's I I'm really glad that you said that. And it's I think it's really important that we have those voices present. We've talked about sort of how transmission works, that you expand the pool of resources that you can draw from, but but ultimately I think the goal in this process is is sort of analogous in in making the process better. How do we expand the voices, the the people who have a seat at the table, very much to include the the landowners who are most directly affected? And I'm not sure we've always done a great job at that, but um, because of your participation and and in both in the case and just as importantly, and how do you make the process better going forward? I think we've got a shot at at doing things better than we've done in the past. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 26:23

All right. So maybe now we can jump into our our lightning round to close things out. Uh Chair, I'll start with you. Can the state place transmission lines anywhere it wants?

SPEAKER_01 26:33

No, it's it's developers that ultimately are developing them, but they they are subject to the laws of the state just like we are. And and those laws are defined in Public Act 30, and that's where our authority comes from. Great.

SPEAKER_02 26:44

Uh Commissioner Paritic, does transmission expansion mean Michigan's grid is failing?

SPEAKER_04 26:50

No, it's not that it's failing. It's more that these projects are about preparing our grid for the future and improving regional energy movement on those highways.

SPEAKER_02 27:01

Uh Val. Some say landowners don't have a voice in routing decisions. Is that true?

SPEAKER_03 27:07

The new guidelines encourage early engagement and they require developers to review alternative routes and landowner suggestions.

SPEAKER_02 27:17

Great. And finally, Commissioner Myers, can public comments alone decide the outcome of these cases?

SPEAKER_00 27:23

No. Public comments alone cannot decide the outcome. In contested cases, evidence matters, and landowners who want their concerns considered should intervene in cases.

SPEAKER_02 27:33

Outstanding. So thank you to all three commissioners for your participation today. Thank you in particular to Val, uh Ms. Walshide Brennan for you being here, both participating in the case last year and then helping to inform our guidelines and participating with us today. I think the bottom line is that Michigan is strengthening both its electric grid and the public processes that help to shape it. Uh appreciate all of our listeners for for joining in with us and hope that you come back again next time behind the meter.