Transmission Lines
Issues Associated with High-Voltage Direct-Current Transmission Lines along Transportation Rights of Way
Gao ID: GAO-08-347R February 1, 2008
Electricity is central to the national economy and the daily lives of many Americans, powering homes, businesses, and industries. Today, an extensive system consisting of more than 150,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines works to provide reliable electricity service and transport electricity from power plants to consumers. Federal and state entities share responsibility for regulating the electricity system. On the federal level, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates interstate transmission of electricity and wholesale rates, among other regulatory activities. State public utility commissions are generally responsible for regulating retail electricity sales and, in some cases, planning for new power plants and transmission lines. However, as studies have shown, growth in electricity demand has strained the nation's transmission system, resulting in less flexibility to respond to system problems and an increased risk of potential blackouts. These issues have led some to suggest that new lines or other investments in the transmission system may be required to increase capacity and accommodate growing electricity demand. Several companies have recently introduced proposals to build new high-voltage direct-current (HVDC) transmission lines. Some of these proposed lines would follow active transportation rights of way, such as railroads, highways, and pipelines. Some stakeholders have raised concerns about the potential economic, safety, and security issues related to collocating new HVDC transmission lines along transportation rights of way, particularly for nearby residents and consumers of electric power. Given these issues, Congress included a provision in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 requiring us to assess the siting of HVDC transmission lines along active railroad and other transportation rights of way and report to appropriate congressional committees. In response to this requirement and after discussions with the committees, we examined (1) the role of the federal government in siting HVDC electric transmission lines along active transportation rights of way, (2) advantages and disadvantages of adding transmission lines and using HVDC technology, and (3) benefits and risks associated with the siting of HVDC electric transmission lines along active transportation rights of way.
Historically, the federal government has had a limited role in siting transmission lines. It has generally only made siting decisions on federal lands. State governments, through public utility commissions and other agencies, traditionally approve transmission line siting. However, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 expanded the federal government's role. Specifically, under certain circumstances, FERC now has the authority to approve and issue siting permits for new transmission lines in areas designated by the Department of Energy as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETC). However, some stakeholders have expressed concerns about FERC's expanded authority in the national corridors, including how the state siting process will be affected and whether states and the public will be involved in FERC's proceedings. FERC officials told us they expect the review of a transmission line proposal in the national corridors would have little impact on the states' existing process. FERC officials also told us that to the extent FERC receives applications, they expect to consider information from the state siting process as part of their federal proceeding and that states and the public will have opportunities to participate in and comment on the federal siting process. Currently, federal statutes as well as federal and state guidance encourage the collocation of new transmission lines along existing transportation and other rights of way. We identified potential advantages and disadvantages to adding transmission lines and using HVDC technology. According to studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed, adding transmission lines offers potential advantages, including (1) decreased congestion and improved reliability of the electricity system by providing access to additional sources of generation and additional paths for electricity, (2) lower costs for consumers at the end of the line where electricity is received, (3) better utilization of existing power plants and more competitive local wholesale electricity markets, (4) facilitated development of new electricity sources location outside population centers, and (5) facilitated development of renewable energy sources. Stakeholders and studies also identified potential disadvantages of adding transmission lines, including (1) diminished economic or aesthetic values of the land if lines are built above ground, (2) raised electricity prices in areas from where the electricity is being taken, and (3) reduced incentives to identify alternatives that decrease demand (e.g., energy conservation). With respect to the potential advantages of using HVDC over HVAC technology, studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed indicated that HVDC lines generally (1) cost less than HVAC over long distances and (2) allow operators of transmission systems to have more control over the direction and the amount of power flowing over HVDC lines. Potential disadvantages of using HVDC over HVAC technology include (1) higher costs for short-distance lines due to the cost of equipment needed to convert DC into AC electricity used by residents and (2) the lack of electricity benefits to consumers living along these lines--unless converter stations are installed at intermediate locations--because such lines are generally not connected to local electricity lines.
GAO-08-347R, Transmission Lines: Issues Associated with High-Voltage Direct-Current Transmission Lines along Transportation Rights of Way
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-08-347R
entitled 'Transmission Lines: Issues Associated with High-Voltage
Direct-Current Transmission Lines along Transportation Rights of Way'
which was released on February 1, 2008.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
United States Government Accountability Office: Washington, DC 20548:
February 1, 2008:
Congressional Addressees:
Subject: Transmission Lines: Issues Associated with High-Voltage Direct-
Current Transmission Lines along Transportation Rights of Way:
Electricity is central to the national economy and the daily lives of
many Americans, powering homes, businesses, and industries. Today, an
extensive system consisting of more than 150,000 miles of high-voltage
transmission lines[Footnote 1] works to provide reliable electricity
service and transport electricity from power plants to consumers.
Federal and state entities share responsibility for regulating the
electricity system. On the federal level, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) regulates interstate transmission of electricity and
wholesale rates, among other regulatory activities. State public
utility commissions are generally responsible for regulating retail
electricity sales and, in some cases, planning for new power plants and
transmission lines.
However, as studies have shown, growth in electricity demand has
strained the nation's transmission system, resulting in less
flexibility to respond to system problems and an increased risk of
potential blackouts.[Footnote 2] These issues have led some to suggest
that new lines or other investments in the transmission system may be
required to increase capacity and accommodate growing electricity
demand. Several companies have recently introduced proposals to build
new high-voltage direct-current (HVDC) transmission lines.[Footnote 3]
Some of these proposed lines would follow active transportation rights
of way, such as railroads, highways, and pipelines. Some stakeholders
have raised concerns about the potential economic, safety, and security
issues related to collocating new HVDC transmission lines along
transportation rights of way, particularly for nearby residents and
consumers of electric power.
Given these issues, Congress included a provision in the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 requiring us to
assess the siting of HVDC transmission lines along active railroad and
other transportation rights of way[Footnote 4] and report to
appropriate congressional committees. In response to this requirement
and after discussions with the committees, we examined (1) the role of
the federal government in siting HVDC electric transmission lines along
active transportation rights of way, (2) advantages and disadvantages
of adding transmission lines and using HVDC technology, and (3)
benefits and risks associated with the siting of HVDC electric
transmission lines along active transportation rights of way.
To determine the federal government's role in siting HVDC electric
transmission lines along active transportation rights of way, we
reviewed applicable laws, regulations, and guidance related to siting
new transmission infrastructure, including the Energy Policy Act of
2005, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and FERC guidance. To
identify the advantages and disadvantages of adding transmission lines
and using HVDC technology, we reviewed relevant reports and studies,
and we interviewed officials from the Departments of Energy, Homeland
Security, and Transportation; officials from FERC, state public utility
commissions, and state departments of transportation; and
representatives from several other stakeholders, including electricity
industry associations and independent system operators. To identify the
benefits and risks of siting HVDC transmission lines along
transportation rights of way, we reviewed literature to identify
frequently cited benefits and risks of siting new HVDC electric
transmission lines along active transportation rights of way for nearby
residents and consumers of electric power. We also conducted site
visits to three states--New York, Utah, and Virginia--where existing
HVDC lines currently follow active railroad, highways, or pipelines, or
where lines have been proposed that would do so. Finally, we
interviewed officials from the Departments of Energy, Homeland
Security, and Transportation; officials from FERC, state public utility
commissions, and state departments of transportation; and
representatives from a number of other stakeholders, such as power
companies, transportation industry associations, and environmental and
other advocacy groups to obtain their perspective on these issues. We
focused our work on transmission line proximity to three types of
transportation rights of way: railroads, highways, and pipelines. We
conducted this performance audit from August 2007 to January 2008 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives. We briefed committee staff
on the results of our review (see enclosure I for a copy of that
briefing). This report formally conveys the information provided during
that briefing.
Results in Brief:
Historically, the federal government has had a limited role in siting
transmission lines. It has generally only made siting decisions on
federal lands. State governments, through public utility commissions
and other agencies, traditionally approve transmission line siting.
However, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 expanded the federal
government's role. Specifically, under certain circumstances, FERC now
has the authority to approve and issue siting permits for new
transmission lines in areas designated by the Department of:
Energy as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETC).
[Footnote 5] However, some stakeholders have expressed concerns about
FERC's expanded authority in the national corridors, including how the
state siting process will be affected and whether states and the public
will be involved in FERC's proceedings. FERC officials told us they
expect the review of a transmission line proposal in the national
corridors would have little impact on the states' existing process.
FERC officials also told us that to the extent FERC receives
applications, they expect to consider information from the state siting
process as part of their federal proceeding and that states and the
public will have opportunities to participate in and comment on the
federal siting process. Currently, federal statutes as well as federal
and state guidance encourage the collocation of new transmission lines
along existing transportation and other rights of way. For example,
FERC guidance for hydroelectric projects provides that existing
transportation and other rights of way should be given priority as
locations for additional transmission facilities. FERC may be able to
apply the principles from this guidance to transmission lines in the
NIETCs. The type of transmission technology--either HVDC or high
voltage, alternating current (HVAC)--does not affect how federal or
state siting decisions are made.
We identified potential advantages and disadvantages to adding
transmission lines and using HVDC technology. According to studies we
reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed, adding transmission lines
offers potential advantages, including (1) decreased congestion and
improved reliability of the electricity system by providing access to
additional sources of generation and additional paths for electricity,
(2) lower costs for consumers at the end of the line where electricity
is received, (3) better utilization of existing power plants and more
competitive local wholesale electricity markets, (4) facilitated
development of new electricity sources location outside population
centers, and (5) facilitated development of renewable energy sources.
Stakeholders and studies also identified potential disadvantages of
adding transmission lines, including (1) diminished economic or
aesthetic values of the land if lines are built above ground, (2)
raised electricity prices in areas from where the electricity is being
taken, and (3) reduced incentives to identify alternatives that
decrease demand (e.g., energy conservation). With respect to the
potential advantages of using HVDC over HVAC technology, studies we
reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed indicated that HVDC lines
generally (1) cost less than HVAC over long distances and (2) allow
operators of transmission systems to have more control over the
direction and the amount of power flowing over HVDC lines. Potential
disadvantages of using HVDC over HVAC technology include (1) higher
costs for short-distance lines due to the cost of equipment needed to
convert DC into AC electricity used by residents and (2) the lack of
electricity benefits to consumers living along these lines--unless
converter stations are installed at intermediate locations--because
such lines are generally not connected to local electricity lines.
We also identified potential benefits and risks resulting from the
collocation of transmission lines along transportation rights of way.
According to studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed,
potential benefits of collocation may include ease of construction and
maintenance of the transmission lines and the reduction of
environmental and visual impacts. For example, electricity stakeholders
told us that building along rights of way may avoid constructing lines
in undisturbed lands. In addition, stakeholders told us that it may be
less costly to acquire the right to add a new transmission line to an
existing right-of-way from a single owner--such as a pipeline, highway,
or railroad--than it would be to acquire the needed rights from
multiple property owners. Potential risks of collocation may include
the increased likelihood of safety and security incidents due to the
proximity of the transmission lines and the transportation
infrastructure. For example, train derailments or highway crashes
potentially could damage transmission lines and fallen transmission
lines could damage transportation infrastructure. In addition, a
collocated transmission line and natural gas line may be a more
desirable terrorist target than either facility on its own. Federal and
state officials told us they have not conducted studies specifically on
these risks, but they expect the probability of these occurrences to be
low. Several infrastructure owners and other stakeholders that we
interviewed said that steps, such as adhering to required clearance
distances for infrastructure maintenance and conducting risk
assessments, can be taken to mitigate the potential risks associated
with collocation.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided the Departments of Energy, Homeland Security, and
Transportation, and FERC a draft of this report, including the slides,
for review and comment. The Departments of Energy, Homeland Security,
and Transportation, and FERC provided technical clarifications, which
we incorporated as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Energy,
Homeland Security, and Transportation, the Commissioners of FERC, and
other interested parties. We will also make copies available to others
upon request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge
on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
Should you or your staffs have any questions on matters discussed in
this report, please contact Mr. Mark Gaffigan at (202) 512-3841 or Mr.
David Wise at (202) 512-2834. Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last
page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in
enclosure II.
Signed by:
Mark Gaffigan:
Acting Director, Natural Resources and Environment:
Signed by:
David Wise:
Acting Director, Physical Infrastructure:
Enclosures:
List of Congressional Addressees:
The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye:
Chairman:
The Honorable Ted Stevens:
Vice Chairman:
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman:
Chairman:
The Honorable Susan M. Collins:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson:
Chairman:
The Honorable Peter T. King:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Homeland Security:
United States House of Representatives:
The Honorable James L. Oberstar:
Chairman:
The Honorable John L. Mica:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure:
United States House of Representatives:
The Honorable Michael A. Arcuri:
United States House of Representatives:
Briefing to Congressional Addressees:
Enclosure I:
Briefing to Congressional Addressees:
Issues Associated with High-Voltage Direct-Current Transmission Lines
along Transportation Rights of Way:
Briefing to Congressional Committees:
Contents:
Objectives:
Scope and Methodology:
Summary:
Background:
Findings:
Figure 1: HVDC Transmission Line along Utah State Highway 174
(photograph):
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Objectives:
The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007
required GAO to assess the siting of high-voltage direct-current (HVDC)
electric transmission lines along active railroad and other
transportation rights of way (ROW).
To meet this requirement and address the interests of committee staff,
we examined the following objectives:
* What is the role of the federal government in siting HVDC electric
transmission lines along active transportation ROW?
* What are the advantages and disadvantages of adding transmission
lines and using HVDC technology?
* What are benefits and risks associated with the siting of HVDC
electric transmission lines along active transportation ROW?
Scope and Methodology:
To answer the objectives, we:
* reviewed applicable laws, regulations, and guidance to determine the
federal government‘s role in the siting of HVDC electric transmission
lines along active transportation ROW;
* interviewed federal and state officials as well as representatives
from other stakeholders, such as electricity industry groups and
independent system operators, and reviewed reports and studies to
identify the advantages and disadvantages of adding transmission lines
and using HVDC technology; and;
* conducted site visits and reviewed literature to understand the
benefits and risks of siting HVDC electric transmission lines along
existing transportation ROW for nearby residents and consumers of
electric power.
We focused our work on transmission line proximity to three types of
transportation ROW: railroads, highways, and pipelines.
For our site visits, we selected three states”New York, Utah, and
Virginia”where existing HVDC lines currently follow active railroad,
highways, or pipelines, or where lines have been proposed that would do
so.
Our findings represent the views of studies we reviewed and
stakeholders we interviewed.
We conducted our work from August 2007 through January 2008 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Summary:
In most cases, the federal government has a limited role in siting
transmission lines:
* State governments traditionally approve transmission line siting
through public utility commissions and other agencies.
* The Energy Policy Act of 2005 expanded the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission‘s (FERC) federal role in siting transmission lines, under
certain circumstances, within the National Interest Electric
Transmission Corridors (NIETC).
* Some stakeholders have expressed concerns about FERC‘s expanded
authority to site transmission lines, including how states and the
public will be involved in the siting process.
* Federal statues as well as federal and state guidance encourage
collocation of new transmission lines along existing transportation
ROW.
Potential advantages and disadvantages to adding transmission lines and
using HVDC technology include:
* Advantages of adding HVDC or high-voltage alternating-current (HVAC)
transmission lines include decreased congestion and lowered costs to
consumers; disadvantages include diminished land value if the lines are
built above ground and reduced incentives to identify alternatives that
decrease demand (e.g., energy conservation);
* Advantages to using HVDC technology include lower costs over long
distances and more system control; disadvantages include a lack of
electricity benefits to those along its route and higher costs compared
to construction of HVAC for short distances.
Potential benefits and risks of transmission lines along transportation
ROW include:
* Benefits: easier construction and maintenance, and reduced
environmental and visual impacts;
* Risks: poses some safety and security risks; studies specifically on
these risks have not been conducted, but probability of these
occurrences expected to be low; several infrastructure owners and other
stakeholders told us that steps can be taken to mitigate these risks.
Background:
HVDC Transmission Lines Are Uncommon in the United States:
Electricity can be transmitted either using alternating-current (AC) or
direct-current (DC).
* AC is an electric current that reverses its direction at regular
intervals;
* DC is an electric current that flows in one direction through a
circuit;
- DC requires operator intervention to reverse the direction;
- DC facilitates interconnection of AC at different frequencies.
The United States electric grid relies primarily on AC technology:
* There are five long-distance HVDC transmission lines;
* HVDC represents about 2 percent of all transmission line miles.
High-voltage transmission lines are usually 230 kilovolts (kV) or
greater.
There are proposals to build additional long-distance HVDC lines in New
York and Virginia, among others.
Figure 2: Map of Total AC and DC High Voltage Transmission Lines (less
than or equal to 230kV) in the United States:
[See PDF for image]
This figure is a map of the United States depicting transmission lines.
Lines are depicted with the following voltage levels (kV):
230 kV;
345 kV;
50o kV;
765 kV;
DC.
Source: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission created using Global
Energy's Energy Velocity Suite.
Note: The 230, 345, 500, and 765 kV lines listed are all alternating
current lines.
[End of figure]
Objective 1:
What is the role of the federal government in siting HVDC electric
transmission lines along active transportation ROW?
Historically, the Federal Government Has Had a Limited Role in Siting
Transmission Lines.
* Generally, the federal government only makes siting decisions on
federal lands.
* State electricity agencies”such as the Public Utility Commission”
traditionally approve transmission line siting within their respective
states.
* The type of transmission technology”either HVDC or HVAC”does not
typically affect how siting decisions are made.
Federal Government‘s Role in Siting Transmission Lines Has Recently
Changed.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 provided additional federal siting
authority:
* The Department of Energy designated two NIETCs in October 2007.
* Within the NIETCs, FERC now has the authority to approve siting of
new transmission lines under certain limited circumstances; that is,if:
- The State does not have authority to approve siting or consider what
the interstate benefits might be;
- The applicant does not qualify for state approval since it does not
serve consumers in that state; or;
- The state entity with siting authority withholds approval for more
than one year or conditions its approval such that the project will not
significantly reduce interstate transmission congestion or is not
economically feasible.
* FERC issued rules specifying requirements for permit applications.
[Footnote 6]
* The Department of Energy is reviewing the applications for rehearing
of its order designating the two NIETCs.
Stakeholders Have Raised Questions about How FERC‘s Expanded Authority
Will Function:
Stakeholders we interviewed raised the following questions about FERC‘s
expanded authority to site transmission lines:
* What will be the impact on the current state siting process?
* Will information from the state siting process be considered?
* Will the state and the public have adequate opportunity to
participate in and comment on the federal proceedings?
In response, FERC officials told us that:
* They expect their review of a transmission proposal in the NIETCs
will have little impact on the state‘s existing siting process;
* To the extent FERC receives applications, they expect to consider
information from the state process as part of the federal proceeding;
and;
* States and the public will have opportunities to participate in and
comment on the federal siting process.
Federal and State Statutes and Guidance Encourage Collocation with
Existing ROW:
Federal statutes and guidance encourage collocation of new transmission
lines with existing transportation ROW. Examples include:
* Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) –to minimize adverse
environmental impacts on federal land, the use of ROW in common is
required to the extent practical;
* Energy Policy Act of 2005 –requires streamlined review and permitting
within corridors designated by FLPMA;
* FERC guidance –for hydroelectric projects, existing ROW should be
given priority as locations for additional electricity transmission
facilities. FERC may be able to apply the principles from the guidance
to transmission lines in the NIETCs.
State guidance encourages collocation of new transmission lines.
Examples include:
* New York guidance –utility facilities should be accommodated within
the highway ROW when such use and occupancy does not interfere with the
free and safe flow of traffic;
* Virginia guidance –cites FERC‘s guidance.
Objective 2:
What are advantages and disadvantages of adding transmission lines and
using HVDC technologies?
Adding Transmission Lines Has Potential Advantages:
Studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed identified the
following potential advantages related to adding transmission lines:
* May decrease congestion and improve reliability of the electricity
system by providing access to additional sources of generation and
additional paths for electricity;
* May lower costs for consumers receiving the electricity;
* May better utilize existing power plants and make local wholesale
electricity markets more competitive (e.g., connecting existing,low-
cost power plants to areas with high power costs may increase
competition and lower prices);
* May facilitate development of new electricity sources located outside
population centers, which sometimes face air quality and other
environmental constraints;
* May facilitate the development of renewable energy sources such as
wind, water, solar, and geothermal energy, which may be located outside
of urban centers.
Adding Transmission Lines Has Potential Disadvantages:
Studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed identified
potential disadvantages related to adding transmission lines:
* May diminish economic or aesthetic land values if lines are built
above ground (e.g., view of landscape may be affected); underground
HVDC and HVAC lines are more expensive to construct and maintain than
above-ground lines;
* May raise electricity prices in areas from where the electricity is
being taken;
* May reduce incentives to identify alternatives that decrease demand
(e.g., energy conservation).
Using HVDC Technology Has Potential Advantages Compared to HVAC:
Studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed identified
potential advantages of HVDC technology over HVAC technology:
* HVDC generally costs less than HVAC over long distances (HVDC has few
or no intermediate interconnections);
- HVDC lines lose less power than HVAC lines;
- HVDC lines may require less ROW width than HVAC (only two lines are
needed for HVDC as opposed to three lines for HVAC);
* HVDC lines can provide transmission operators with more control over
the direction and amount of power flowing than HVAC lines.
Using HVDC Technology Has Potential Disadvantages Compared to HVAC:
Studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed identified
potential disadvantages of HVDC technology over HVAC technology:
* Short-distance HVDC lines can be more expensive to construct than
HVAC due to the need to convert direct-current into alternating-current
electricity used by consumers;
* HVDC lines do not typically provide electricity benefits to residents
along their routes, unless converter stations are installed at
intermediate locations, because such lines are generally not connected
to local electricity lines.
Objective 3:
What are benefits and risks associated with siting HVDC electric
transmission lines along active transportation ROW?
Collocation Has Potential Benefits:
Studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed identified
potential benefits:
* Construction and maintenance:
- May facilitate access to transmission lines for construction and
maintenance;
- May facilitate negotiation of a new ROW agreement;
- May reduce the need to designate a new ROW in residential,
commercial, and industrial areas where limited space is available for
transmission lines.
* Environmental and visual:
- Can avoid impacting undisturbed land and surrounding areas.
* Economic:
- Use of existing single ROW may be less costly than acquiring new
property rights or property from multiple owners;
- Current owner of ROW may benefit from payment for additional use of
ROW.
Collocation Has Potential Risks:
Studies we reviewed and stakeholders we interviewed identified
potential safety and security risks;
* Safety:
- Accidents from transportation infrastructure users (such as train
derailments or highway crashes) could damage transmission lines and
fallen transmission lines could damage transportation infrastructure;
- Electromagnetic fields and stray current could interfere with
railroad signaling systems and highway traffic operations, and
accelerate pipeline corrosion, resulting in accidents;
- Maintenance workers may be more likely to be injured given increased
safety risk from close proximity of transmission lines to
transportation ROW;
* Security:
- Collocation may make the corridor a more attractive target;
- Events that would otherwise be isolated (e.g., a pipeline explosion)
could lead to service interruptions on the transmission line or along
active ROW.
Federal and state officials we interviewed told us that while they have
not conducted studies specifically on these risks, they expect the
probability of these occurrences to be low.
Steps Can Be Taken to Mitigate Potential Risks of Collocation:
Various stakeholders, including industry associations and
infrastructure owners, reported that steps can be taken to mitigate
potential risks associated with collocation.
Examples of approaches for mitigating potential collocation risks
include:
* Along pipelines–Ensure electric current emitted from the line will
not interfere with cathodic protection (which helps to prevent
corrosion) required under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration regulations, or otherwise directly or indirectly
accelerate pipeline corrosion;
* Along railroads –Ensure line‘s magnetic fields will not interfere
with railroad signal systems; tower design must adhere to required
clearances for maintenance;
* Along highways –Encourage assessments of potential collocation risks;
Ensure transmission towers and lines will not impede traffic operations
and the free flow of traffic or possible future expansion of roadway.
[End of enclosure]
Enclosure II:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Key contributors to this report were Nikki Clowers, Assistant Director;
Jon Ludwigson, Assistant Director; Vidhya Ananthakrishnan; Allen Chan;
Colin Fallon; Philip Farah; Kathleen Gilhooly; Brandon Haller; Dawn
Hoff; Tina Won Sherman; and Barbara Timmerman.
[End of enclosure]
Footnotes:
[1] High-voltage transmission lines carry currents of usually 230
kilovolts or greater.
[2] See U.S. Department of Energy, National Transmission Grid Study
(May 2002) pp. 5-6; Congressional Research Service, Electric
Transmission: Approaches for Energizing a Sagging Economy (Apr. 27,
2007) pp. 1-2; and National Council on Electricity Policy, Electricity
Transmission: A Primer (June 2004) pp. 6-7.
[3] DC technology is defined as current that flows in one direction
through a circuit and requires operator intervention to reverse the
direction. The majority (98 percent) of all transmission line miles in
North America use alternating current (AC) technology, whereby the
current reverses direction at regular intervals without operator
intervention. DC can be converted into AC, and vice versa, using a
converter station.
[4] Pub. L. No. 110-53, § 1525 (Aug. 3, 2007).
[5] As required by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Department of
Energy established NIETCs in October 2007, within which FERC now has
the authority to approve siting of new transmission lines under certain
circumstances; that is, if: (1) the state does not have authority to
approve siting or consider what the interstate benefits might be; (2)
the applicant does not qualify for state approval since it does not
serve consumers in that state; or (3) the state entity with siting
authority withholds approval for more than 1 year, or conditions its
approval such that the project will not significantly reduce interstate
transmission congestion or is not economically feasible. See Pub. L.
No. 109-58 § 1221(a) (Aug. 8, 2005). FERC issued rules specifying
requirements for permit applications. See FERC Order No. 689,
Regulations for Filing Applications for Permits to Site Interstate
Electric Transmission Facilities. The Department of Energy is reviewing
the applications for rehearing of its order designating the two NIETCs.
[6] See FERC Order No. 689, Regulations for Filing Applications for
Permits to Site Interstate Electric Transmission Facilities.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548: