A national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

Innovation for Our Energy Future 

State Transmission Infrastructure 

Authorities: The Story So Far 

December 2007 – December 2008 

K. Porter and S. Fink 

Exeter Associates, Inc. 

Columbia, Maryland 

Subcontract Report 

NREL/SR-500-43146 

May 2008 

NREL is operated by Midwest Research Institute ● Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 
National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 

303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov 

Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle 

Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337

Subcontract Report 

NREL/SR-500-43146 

May 2008 

State Transmission Infrastructure 

Authorities: The Story So Far 

December 2007 – December 2008 

K. Porter and S. Fink 

Exeter Associates, Inc. 

Columbia, Maryland 

NREL Technical Monitor: David Corbus 

Prepared under Subcontract No. LAM-8-77548-01 
NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. 

Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any 

warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or 

usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not 

infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by 

trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, 

recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and 

opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States 

government or any agency thereof. 

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy 

and its contractors, in paper, from: 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Office of Scientific and Technical Information 

P.O. Box 62 

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 

phone: 865.576.8401 

fax: 865.576.5728 

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from: 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

National Technical Information Service 

5285 Port Royal Road 

Springfield, VA 22161 

phone: 800.553.6847 

fax: 703.605.6900 

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov

online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm

This publication received minimal editorial review at NREL 

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE

I. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 

II. Characteristics of State Infrastructure Authorities ................................................... 2 

 Project Development and Ownership....................................................................... 3 

 Bonding Authority.................................................................................................... 4 

III. Progress to Date........................................................................................................ 8 

IV. Implications for Wind Power ................................................................................. 14 

V. Issues Facing State Infrastructure Authorities........................................................ 15 

VI. Conclusion and Recommendations ........................................................................ 17 

LIST OF TABLES 

PAGE

1 Characteristics of State Infrastructure Authorities ................................................... 6 

2 Potential Large Transmission Projects that State Transmission Infrastructure 

Authorities May be Involved In ............................................................................. 14 

LISTS OF FIGURES 

PAGE

1 States with Transmission Infrastructure Authorities................................................ 3 

2 Proposed Kansas Transmission Projects ................................................................ 10 

3 Wyoming-Colorado Intertie Transmission Project ................................................ 11 

4 TransWest Express/Gateway South Transmission Projects................................... 12 

5 High Plains Express Transmission Project............................................................. 13 

 iii
APPENDIX 

PAGE

Colorado.......................................................................................................................... A-1 

Idaho ................................................................................................................................B-1 

Kansas..............................................................................................................................C-1 

New Mexico.................................................................................................................... D-1 

North Dakota....................................................................................................................E-1 

South Dakota....................................................................................................................F-1 

Wyoming......................................................................................................................... G-1 

 iv
Acknowledgments

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Wind Technologies Program funded the 

research that went into this project. The authors thank Brian Parsons and David Corbus 

of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for supporting this work. 

Five of the seven state transmission infrastructure authorities agreed to be interviewed for 

this report. They also graciously answered several questions that arose during the course 

of this project and reviewed initial drafts of the report and of the state profiles. We thank 

the representatives of the state transmission infrastructure authorities for their assistance. 

We also thank Erik Ela and Lynn Coles of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 

and Andrew Mills and Ryan Wiser of the Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National 

Laboratory for their review comments. Finally, the authors thank Bruce Green of the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory for his editorial assistance. 

 v
I. Introduction 

Increasing recognition of the need for more transmission and the desire to access new generating 

resources has led to an increased emphasis on transmission planning and development. The 

Western Governors’ Association’s Clean and Diversified Energy Advisory Committee identified 

transmission as a critical element in achieving their goal of securing 30 GW of clean energy by 

2015.a Furthermore, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) made transmission 

planning an important part of Order 890, calling upon all FERC-regulated transmission providers 

to file their transmission planning practices at FERC.b The North American Electric Reliability 

Corporation recently stated that more transmission is needed to ease the strain on the existing 

transmission system, to make up for past under-investment in transmission, and to better 

incorporate renewable energy technologies such as wind energy.c 

Increasing growth in the development of renewable energy resources and the interest in 

encouraging more renewable energy development is also occurring. Over 5,000 MW of wind 

came online in the United States in 2007, bringing total U.S. installed wind capacity to over 

16,800 MW.d

 The Geothermal Energy Association reported that 2,850 MW of geothermal 

capacity was in operation as of 2007, with another 2,455 MW in various stages of development.e 

The solar energy industry is also growing, with the first large-scale utility solar thermal project in 

nearly 20 years coming online in Nevada in 2007. Another 22,000 MW of solar energy projects 

are in the California Independent System Operator’s interconnection queue.f

 

Recently, seven states have created transmission infrastructure authorities to help facilitate, 

enable, and perhaps finance new transmission facilities to access new energy resources including 

renewable energy. In general, these transmission infrastructure authorities are modeled after state 

finance or development authorities and are empowered to issue bonds in support of transmission 

(and, in some cases, generation and distribution) facilities. These state transmission infrastructure 

authorities do not rely on the full faith and credit of the state in issuing bonds. Instead, the bonds 

issued will likely be revenue bonds that must be secured by a revenue stream from the 

transmission investment, such as usage charges or lease payments. As a general matter, the 

bonds are exempt from state taxes but are still subject to federal taxes. While the focus and main 

purpose for the creation of these infrastructure authorities is to advance transmission 

 

a

 Western Governors’ Association. (June 2006). Clean Energy, A Strong Economy and A Healthy Environment. 

Report of the Clean and Diversified Energy Advisory Committee to the Western Governors Association. 

http://www.westgov.org/wga/meetings/am2006/CDEAC06.pdf. (Accessed April 4, 2008). 

b Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. (February 2007). Order No. 890, 18 CFR Parts 35 and 37. 

http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/comm-meet/2007/021507/E-1.pdf. (Accessed February 5, 2008). c North American Electric Reliability Corporation. (October 2007). 2007 Long-Term Reliability Assessment. 

ftp://ftp.nerc.com/pub/sys/all_updl/docs/pubs/LTRA2007.pdf. (Accessed February 5, 2008). d

 American Wind Energy Association. (January 2007). AWEA 2007 Market Report. 

http://www.awea.org/projects/pdf/Market_Report_Jan08.pdf. (Accessed April 3, 2008). e

 Geothermal Energy Association. (May 2007). Update on US Geothermal Power Production and Development.

http://www.geoenergy.org/publications/reports/May2007GEAUpdateonUSGeothermalPowerProductionandDevelopment.pdf. 

(Accessed April 3, 2008). 

f

 Internal estimate prepared by Exeter Associates. The California ISO interconnection queue can be viewed at 

http://www.caiso.com/14e9/14e9ddda1ebf0.pdf. 

1
development, some of them have been granted the ability to pursue generation and/or distribution 

projects as well. Most of the authorities have also been given the ability to exercise the power of 

eminent domain with respect to project siting within their jurisdictions. State transmission 

infrastructure authorities are also serving a coordinating function and bringing much needed 

attention to transmission development by acting as early incubators and catalysts for 

transmission projects. Nearly all the state transmission infrastructure authorities were formed to 

tap into extensive in-state resources such as wind and coal for export to out-of-state load centers. 

States with transmission infrastructure authorities are located in regions with some of the best 

wind potential in the country. By national ranking according to wind resource quality, North 

Dakota is rated 1st; Kansas 3rd; South Dakota 4th; Wyoming 7th; Colorado 11th; New Mexico 12th; 

and Idaho 13th.

g

 Except for Colorado and Kansas, none of the states with transmission 

infrastructure authorities are in the top ten of states with installed wind capacity, suggesting state 

transmission infrastructure authorities could perhaps help their states unlock wind potential 

through upgrading or adding transmission.h

This report examines the status and future direction of state transmission infrastructure 

authorities. The report begins by summarizing common characteristics of state transmission 

infrastructure authorities, goes on to discuss some transmission projects that state infrastructure 

authorities are involved in and then outlines common issues the state infrastructure authorities 

have faced. The report closes with some recommendations. An appendix profiling each of the 

state infrastructure authorities is at the end of this report. 

II. Characteristics of State Infrastructure Authorities 

Wyoming was the first state to establish a transmission infrastructure authority when the 

Wyoming Infrastructure Authority (WIA) was created in 2004. The WIA was modeled after the 

Wyoming Pipeline Authority, which has been successful in facilitating natural gas pipeline 

development in the state. Other states have followed suit, resulting in the creation of the South 

Dakota Energy Infrastructure Authority (SDEIA), the North Dakota Transmission Authority 

(NDTA), the Idaho Energy Resources Authority (IERA), and the Kansas Electric Transmission 

Authority (KETA) in 2005, then more recently, the New Mexico Renewable Energy 

Transmission Authority (RETA) and the Colorado Clean Energy Development Authority 

(CEDA) in 2007 (see Figure 1). 

 

g American Wind Energy Association. Wind Energy: An Untapped Resource. 

http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/Wind_Energy_An_Untapped_Resource.pdf. (Accessed February 12, 2008). 

h American Wind Energy Association. U.S. Wind Energy Projects. http://www.awea.org/projects (Accessed 

February 12, 2008).

2
Figure 1. States with Transmission Infrastructure Authorities 

As a rule, these states are rich in potential generation resources and generally have a desire to 

develop those resources for export to other states. Wyoming has significant wind, natural gas, 

and coal resources that it would like to develop and transmit to load centers in the West. South 

Dakota and North Dakota also have coal and wind resources that they would like to develop and 

transmit into load centers in the Midwest. New Mexico and Colorado have created their 

authorities primarily for the purpose of developing and marketing their renewable energy 

resources. Kansas is situated between the Western and Eastern Interconnections, potentially 

allowing the state the opportunity to market its wind and coal resources to both interconnections. 

By contrast, Idaho is a net energy importer and the transmission infrastructure authority was 

mainly created for the purpose of adding or accessing new generating resources to help enhance 

the state’s energy reliability. 

Project Development and Ownership 

Differences exist among the state transmission infrastructure authorities with respect to the types 

of projects that are eligible and each authority’s ability to construct, own, and/or operate 

facilities. KETA, NDTA, and RETA are only allowed to engage in transmission development, 

although RETA may also finance electricity storage facilities. RETA has a requirement that the 

transmission projects it gets involved with are expected to source at least 30 percent of the 

energy from renewables. CEDA can only engage in clean energy projects but, in addition to 

transmission, can finance generation, transportation, storage, and equipment manufacturing 

facilities. CEDA’s scope also includes clean fuel projects such as biodiesel and ethanol, and 

3
potentially clean coal technologies.i

 IERA can develop generation, transmission, or distribution 

projects, but it must partner with a utility or independent power producer. WIA and SDEIA can 

become involved with both generation and transmission; however, both authorities have decided 

to focus initially on transmission, viewing it as the most pressing issue. 

State transmission infrastructure authorities have different restrictions on owning and operating 

transmission facilities. CEDA is a financing authority only and cannot own or operate any 

facilities. NDTA, SDEIA, and WIA can construct, obtain, own, and operate any eligible 

facilities. However, NDTA and SDEIA are required to divest those facilities at the first 

economically practical opportunity, and WIA has been directed to review, at least every three 

years, the feasibility of disposing of facilities it holds. RETA can only own facilities as long as 

they are leased to other entities, although there is no mandatory divestiture requirement. IERA 

develops facilities on behalf of or in partnership with utilities or independent power producers, 

with the decision on subsequent project operation resting with the utility or independent power 

producer. These entities can request that IERA operate the facility on their behalf. KETA is the 

only authority without limitations or conditions on owning transmission infrastructure facilities 

and may choose to construct or acquire eligible facilities and own them in perpetuity. KETA is 

only restricted with respect to operating transmission facilities and must contract out facility 

operations to a qualified entity. 

State transmission infrastructure authorities typically are required to give public notice in 

developing a project, and allow market participants to step in if they wish. KETA, RETA, 

NDTA, and WIA must all publicly advertise their intent to develop a project and grant other 

entities the ability to come forward and assume the project. The Kansas, New Mexico, and 

Wyoming transmission infrastructure authorities may resume project development themselves if 

the other entity does not make progress within a set period of time (180 days for KETA and 

WIA, 12 months for RETA). NDTA may assess proposals from other market participants and 

may continue with the project itself if NDTA determines that doing so is in the public interest. 

CEDA and IERA do not act as independent developers and therefore have no public notice 

requirement. CEDA’s role is a project financer, and IERA works only in partnership with 

qualified utilities or Independent Power Producers (IPP). SDEIA also has no specific notice 

requirement for projects. 

Bonding Authority 

All of the authorities are created as instrumentalities of the state and can issue revenue bonds. As 

the authorities are not agents of the state, these bonds are liabilities of the authorities only and do 

not constitute liabilities of the respective states. The authorities in Idaho, New Mexico, 

Wyoming, and Kansas can issue bonds at their own discretion through resolutions of their 

boards, although the Kansas Finance Authority issues the bonds on KETA’s behalf. South 

 

i

 CEDA has been directed to convene an advisory panel that will make recommendations on whether hydroelectric 

power should be included under clean energy; whether and what restrictions should be adopted for biomass; and 

whether integrated gasification combined cycle generation facilities or other clean coal technologies with carbon 

sequestration should be considered clean energy projects. CEDA is to convene the panel when sufficient funding 

has been received from gifts, grants, donations, or project fees. 

4
Dakota requires legislative authorization for the SDEIA to issue bonds. Colorado also requires 

legislative authorization, although CEDA has pre-authorized approval to issue up to $40 million 

in bonds annually for transmission for wind projects and up to $25 million in bonds annually for 

solar projects. Voter approval of CEDA bonds may be necessary if CEDA is unable to realize 

sufficient revenues to cover the bond payments, unless the bond payments are secured by a thirdparty financing agreement, a reserve fund, or by a mortgage on the facilities. NDTA is part of 

the North Dakota Industrial Commission and bond issuances are done through the Industrial 

Commission. 

All the authorities are expected to be financially self-supporting in the long term with revenues 

arising from the financial returns from completed projects. The authorities have different limits 

as to the amount of bonds they may issue. WIA has a $1 billion bonding cap for bonds issued for 

private sector projects but no limit to bonding for WIA-developed facilities. SDEIA has a total 

bonding cap set at $1 billion, and NDTA’s is set at $800 million. IERA, KETA, and RETA do 

not at this time have a cap. CEDA also does not have a cap, but the annual bond payments 

cannot exceed $8 million. Table 1 provides the characteristics of the various state infrastructure 

authorities. 

5
Table 1. Characteristics of State Infrastructure Authorities 

Bonding 

Authority 

Eligible 

Projects 

Project 

Ownership, 

Operation, 

and Cost 

Recovery 

Public Notice 

In-state 

Bylaws and 

Eminent 

Domain 

Operational 

Funding 

Colorado 

Clean Energy 

Development 

Authority 

Can issue 

revenue bonds 

through 

resolutions of 

the board but 

need to be 

approved by 

legislature. 

Bonds preauthorized for 

up to $40 

million 

annually for 

wind projects 

and up to $25 

million for 

solar energy 

projects. No 

cap, but bond 

annual 

payments 

cannot exceed 

$8 million. 

Generation, 

transportation, 

transmission, 

equipment 

manufacturing, 

and storage of 

clean energy, 

or non-clean if 

will be clean 

within 5 years. 

Can only 

provide 

project 

financing 

and 

development 

support; 

cannot own 

or operate. 

No public 

notice 

requirement. 

Can adopt 

and amend 

bylaws and 

exercise any 

authority 

necessary to 

achieve its 

objectives. 

Can receive 

grants, loans, 

contributions, 

and other 

financial aid. 

Is receiving 

some start-up 

support from 

the Colorado 

Clean Energy 

Fund. 

Idaho Energy 

Resources 

Authority 

Can issue 

revenue bonds 

through 

resolutions of 

the board. No 

cap has been 

set. 

Generation, 

transmission, 

and 

distribution 

facilities but 

only in 

partnership 

with a utility 

or IPP. 

Ownership 

allowed with 

no 

divestiture 

requirement 

unless the 

utility or IPP 

requests it. 

Utilities can 

request cost 

recovery 

through rates 

from the 

Idaho PUC. 

No public 

notice 

requirement. 

Can adopt 

bylaws. Can 

exercise 

eminent 

domain with 

respect to 

generation 

and 

transmission 

projects. 

Can receive 

grants, loans, 

contributions, 

and other 

financial aid. 

Received 

$50,000 startup funds from 

Idaho 

ConsumerOwned 

Utilities 

Association in 

2006. 

6
Bonding 

Authority 

Eligible 

Projects 

Project 

Ownership, 

Operation, 

and Cost 

Recovery 

Public Notice 

In-state 

Bylaws and 

Eminent 

Domain 

Operational 

Funding 

Kansas 

Electric 

Transmission 

Authority 

Contracts with 

the Kansas 

Development 

Finance 

Authority to 

issue revenue 

bonds. No cap 

has been set. 

Transmission 

and related 

supporting 

infrastructure 

only. For outof-state 

facilities, at 

least 51% of 

the project 

cost must be 

realized in 

Kansas. 

Ownership 

allowed with 

no 

divestiture 

requirement, 

but facility 

operation 

must be 

contracted 

out. Can 

recover costs 

through SPP 

and in-state 

tariffs. 

90 days public 

notice of intent 

to develop. If 

private 

developer 

expresses intent 

to develop 

project, it has 

180 days to 

show progress 

or KETA can 

proceed with 

the project. 

Can adopt 

bylaws and 

use power 

of eminent 

domain 

subject to 

Corporate 

Commission 

regulations. 

Can receive 

grants, loans, 

contributions, 

and other 

financial aid. 

Legislature 

appropriated 

$170,000 for 

2007 and 2008 

for operations 

from the 

Public Service 

Regulatory 

Commission 

and 

established a 

$1 million 

contingency 

fund for 

project 

support. 

New Mexico 

Renewable 

Energy 

Transmission 

Authority 

Can issue 

revenue bonds 

through 

resolutions of 

the board. No 

cap set. 

Transmission 

projects with 

at least 30% 

from 

renewable 

energy and 

electric storage 

projects. 

Not allowed 

to own or 

control 

facilities 

unless they 

are leased to 

other 

entities. 

Utilities 

involved in 

projects can 

recover costs 

through 

rates. 

Must give 90 

days notice of 

intent to 

develop. Other 

developer has 

12 months to 

show progress 

on project or 

RETA may 

reacquire. 

Can 

exercise 

power of 

eminent 

domain. 

Can receive 

grants, loans, 

contributions, 

and other 

financial aid. 

Has received 

$1 million in 

start-up 

funding from 

legislature. 

North Dakota 

Transmission 

Authority 

Can issue 

revenue bonds 

with 

authorization 

from the 

North Dakota 

Industrial 

Commission. 

Cap set at 

$800 million. 

Transmission 

facilities only. 

Ownership 

allowed but 

must divest 

as soon as 

economically 

practical. 

Can establish 

rates, fees, or 

tariffs 

through 

PSC. 

Must give 180 

days notice of 

intent to 

develop and 

may still 

proceed even if 

another entity 

notifies intent to 

take on project 

if NDTA 

determines that 

doing so is in 

the public 

interest. 

Can 

investigate, 

plan, 

prioritize, 

and propose 

electric 

transmission 

corridors. 

Part of North 

Dakota 

Industrial 

Commission 

and works 

under its 

budget. 

7
Bonding 

Authority 

Eligible 

Projects 

Project 

Ownership, 

Operation, 

and Cost 

Recovery 

Public Notice 

In-state 

Bylaws and 

Eminent 

Domain 

Operational 

Funding 

South Dakota 

Energy 

Infrastructure 

Authority 

Can issue 

revenue bonds 

but must be 

approved by 

the legislature. 

Cap set at $1 

billion. 

All energy 

production and 

transmission 

facilities but 

has chosen to 

focus on 

electricity. 

Ownership 

allowed but 

must divest 

as soon as 

economically 

practical. 

No project 

notice 

requirements. 

Can 

exercise 

power of 

eminent 

domain. 

Can receive 

grants, loans, 

contributions, 

and other 

financial aid. 

Received 

$247,000 in 

start-up 

funding from 

the legislature 

for 2006 and 

2007, and 

$56,000 for 

2008. 

Wyoming 

Infrastructure 

Authority 

Can issue 

revenue bonds 

through 

resolutions of 

the board. Cap 

set at $1 

billion for 

separate entity 

project 

financing. 

Transmission 

and clean coal 

generation 

facilities. 

Can own and 

operate; 

policy 

preference is 

not to. 

Must give 30 

days notice of 

intent to 

develop. Other 

developer has 

180 days to 

show progress 

on project or 

WIA may 

reacquire. 

Can 

exercise 

power of 

eminent 

domain. 

Can receive 

loans, grants, 

contributions, 

and other 

financial aid. 

Currently has a 

$1.6 million 

operating 

budget and 

$10 million 

available for 

project 

development 

support. 

III. Progress to Date 

Considering that the oldest operating state transmission infrastructure authority is just four years 

old, that two were established in 2007, and that developing large transmission projects can take 

several years, it is perhaps too soon to make a full evaluation of the impacts of state transmission 

infrastructure authorities. Nevertheless, state transmission infrastructure authorities are having 

an impact by facilitating some transmission projects. 

KETA has indirectly stimulated at least two proposed transmission projects that were part of the 

Southwest Power Pool’s (SPP) X Plan, despite not being directly involved or issuing any bonds 

to date. The X Plan is a proposed project that would add new transmission lines in the shape of 

an X throughout the wind-rich plains of Oklahoma and Kansas. In April 2007, SPP and KETA 

finalized a study of the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of various line configurations within 

8
Kansas related to the X Plan.j

 In May 2007, KETA expressed interest in developing the 

following X Plan line segments within Kansas: 345 kV lines from Spearville to Reno and from 

Spearville to Knoll.k

 ITC Great Plains subsequently announced its intent to construct and 

operate a new transmission line with capacity of at least 345 kV from Spearville to a new 

substation in Comanche County and to an interconnection close to Wichita with a preliminary 

online date of 2010.l

 This line is equivalent to the Spearville to Reno segment examined by 

KETA in its initial feasibility study. 

In August 2007, KETA announced its intent to proceed with the 345 kV line from Spearville to 

Knoll with an additional segment from Knoll to Axtell, Nebraska. ITC Great Plains provided 

notice that it would undertake this project also. As a result, KETA is now in the position of 

monitoring the progress of ITC Great Plains on these two projects (see Figure 2). Separately, 

Westar has announced plans to construct a 345 kV line from Wichita north to Salinas, Kansas, 

and a separate 345 kV line also originating near Wichita and continuing south to Perry, 

Oklahoma.m Although KETA has effectively been supplanted in the transmission projects it 

wanted to sponsor, KETA officials indicate that the transmission activity in Kansas is an early 

indication of KETA’s success by providing an impetus for transmission to precede without 

KETA’s financial or direct involvement. Indeed, KETA officials have stated that KETA will be 

a success if companies build transmission without KETA being involved at all.n

 

 

j

Southwest Power Pool. (April 2007). Kansas Electric Transmission Authority (KETA) Study. 

http://sppoasis.spp.org/documents/swpp/transmission/ketanew.doc. (Accessed February 1, 2008). k

 Kansas Electric Transmission Authority. (July 2007). Framework for Considering a Notice to Proceed With 

Construction. http://www.accesskansas.org/keta/Notice.shtml. (Accessed February 12, 2008). l

 Kansas Electric Transmission Authority. (August 2007). Letter from ITC Great Plains. 

http://www.accesskansas.org/keta/Notice.shtml. (Accessed February 12, 2008). 

m Westar Energy. Transmission Projects. 

http://www.westarenergy.com/corp_com/contentmgt.nsf/publishedpages/transmission. (Accessed February 12, 

2008). 

n

 Presentation of the Honorable Carl Holmes to the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative’s Southwest Power 

Pool Workshop, Dallas, Texas, August 22, 2007.

9
Figure 2. Proposed Kansas Transmission Projects 

Source: Quantas Technology and Southwest Power Pool. (March 2008). Final Report on the Southwest 

Power Pool (SPP) Updated EHV Overlay Study. 

http://www.spp.org/publications/Quanta_Technology_March_2_2008_Update_to_the_EHV_Study_

Final_Report.pdf. (Accessed March 26, 2008). 

To date, WIA is the only state transmission infrastructure authority to have issued bonds. In 

September 2005, WIA did a private placement of bonds to the Wyoming State Treasurer, 

amounting to $34.5 million. The proceeds financed three-quarters of the cost of the Hughes 

Transmission Project, a 130-mile, 230 kV transmission line being constructed by the Basin 

Electric Power Cooperative of Bismarck, North Dakota. WIA estimates it will receive about 

$600,000 in proceeds over 20 years through a loan fee structured into the agreement.o

WIA has several other transmission projects in various stages of development. In 2008, WIA 

plans to hold an open season to allocate transmission capacity from the planned WyomingColorado Intertie Transmission Project (see Figure 3). The Intertie Project was first identified as 

one a Rocky Mountain Area Transmission Study (RMATS) projects, a set of regional 

transmission projects aimed at enhancing the grid in Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho, and Montana.p

WIA has partnered with Trans-Elect and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) to 

develop the Wyoming-Colorado Intertie section (TOT-3 under RMATS), aimed at building a 

 

o Wyoming-Colorado Intertie Transmission Project. http://www.wyia.org/wci/index.html. (Accessed February 12, 

2008).

p Rocky Mountain Area Transmission Study. (September 2004). 

http://psc.state.wy.us/htdocs/subregional/FinalReport/rmatsfinalreport.htm. (Accessed January 30, 2008). 

10
345-kV transmission line from Wyoming to the Pawnee substation in Colorado. Ultimately, 

between 800 and 900 MW could be transferred between Wyoming and Colorado and, depending 

on the response to the open season, the line could be double-circuited to allow more capacity. 

The tentative on-line date is 2013. 

Figure 3. Wyoming-Colorado Intertie Transmission Project 

Source: Robert Mitchell. “TOT 3 Project Update: A Public/Private Partnership,” Presented at the Wyoming 

Infrastructure Authority Board Meeting. http://www.wyia.org/wci/presentations/TOT3%20Presentation--1-30-

2007.pdf (Accessed March 14, 2008). 

11
WIA holds a 10% stake in a potentially much larger project, the TransWest 

Express/Gateway South project that could transmit between 4,500 and 7,500 MW of 

Wyoming coal and wind generation into the Desert Southwest (see Figure 4). WIA has 

partnered with Arizona Public Service (APS) and National Grid, and collectively the 

participants will initially invest about $100 million to design and engineer the line and 

secure necessary permits and route right-of-ways. In August 2007, WIA entered into an 

interim agreement with APS, National Grid, and PacifiCorp to potentially co-develop the 

TransWest Express with Gateway South, a proposed transmission line by PacifiCorp that 

would extend from Wyoming into Utah and into the Desert Southwest. National Grid 

will be the lead developer for both lines, with active participation from WIA, APS, and 

PacifiCorp. Right-of-way applications have been filed, and the participants are working 

with the Bureau of Land Management on developing an environmental impact 

statement.q

 

Figure 4. TransWest Express/Gateway South Transmission Projects 

Source: Robert Stade. “TransWest Express and Gateway South.” Presentation before the Roping 

the Wind Conference, Douglas, Wyoming. January 8, 2007. www.wyia.org. (accessed 

February 12, 2008). 

WIA is also participating with CEDA, potentially RETA, and several utilities in studying 

the feasibility of the High Plains Express, a potential 500 kV project from northeast 

Wyoming heading south through eastern Colorado to New Mexico and Arizona (See 

Figure 5). As now conceived, the High Plains Express could consist of two 500 kV lines 

 

q

 Stade, R. (January 2007). “TransWest Express and Gateway South.” Presentated at the Roping the Wind 

Conference, Douglas, Wyoming. http://www.wyia.org. (Accessed February 12, 2008). 

12
spanning 1,200 miles carrying 2,000 to 3,000 MW. If developed, the High Plains 

Express project could tie in with the Wyoming-Colorado Intertie project; the proposed 

Eastern Plains Transmission Project in eastern Colorado; and the proposed New Mexico 

Wind Collector System and SunZia transmission projects.. Feasibility studies indicate 

that the project has significant benefits. Next steps include more detailed system, siting, 

and economic studies; determining who will participate in the project; more precisely 

defining the project; followed by design and engineering, siting, right of way 

procurement, and construction. Assuming these activities can be successfully 

accomplished, the High Plains Express project could begin operating by 2017.r

Figure 5. High Plains Express Transmission Project 

Source: Vaninetti, J. (December 2007). “Regional Transmission Development: High Plains 

Express Project.” Presented at the Colorado Clean Energy Development Authority, 

Denver, Colorado. http://www.wyia.org. (Accessed February 12, 2008). 

 

r Vaninetti, J. (September 2007). “Enabling Renewables Via Transmission.” Presentated at the Increasing 

Renewable Energy in the Western Grid Summit, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

http://www.nationalwind.org/pdf/Vaninettiv2NWCCTrans-Elect.pdf . (Accessed February 12, 2008).

13
IV. Implications for Wind Power 

All seven state transmission infrastructure authorities are located in states with highquality wind resources. As such, any success these authorities have in funding and/or 

supporting new transmission could lead to increased market opportunities to wind power. 

The total transfer capability of the Wyoming-Colorado Intertie and the TransWest 

Express/Gateway South projects, for example, amount to about 8,500 MW. Already, it is 

expected that wind power will make up most, if not all, of the capacity on the WyomingColorado Intertie, as well as some of the capacity on the High Plains Express project. In 

all, about 3,000 MW of wind power could be developed from these transmission projects, 

and that does not account for proposed transmission projects in Kansas, other large 

regional projects such as TransWest Express/Gateway South, or for the supporting 

transmission projects that could be part of High Plains Express that could result in more 

wind power (see Table 2). The actual amount of wind energy that is transmitted on these 

lines, should the transmission projects be developed, will depend on, among other factors, 

state energy and environmental policies and wind energy economics as compared to other 

energy resources. 

Table 2. Potential Large Transmission Projects that State Transmission 

Infrastructure Authorities May be Involved In 

Name Likely Fuel Types 

on Line 

Total Transfer 

Capability (MW) 

Potential MW 

of Wind** 

Wyoming-Colorado 

Intertie Wind 800 - 900 800 - 900* 

TransWest 

Express/Gateway South 

Wind, Coal, Natural 

Gas 4,500 - 7,500 Unknown 

High Plains Express Wind, Solar, Coal, 

Natural Gas 3,000 1,000 – 2,000 

Eastern Plains Coal, Natural Gas 1,200 - 1,800 0 

X-Plan Coal, Wind 2,600 Unknown 

SunZia Natural Gas, Wind, 

Solar, Geothermal 3,000 Unknown 

 *Actual amount will depend on the results of an open season to be held in Summer 2008. 

 **Based on respective project feasibility study results. 

The other state transmission infrastructure authorities have not been as active as 

Wyoming and Kansas. NDTA brokered a deal between the Bank of North Dakota and 

Basin Electric Power Cooperative for $25 million to fund a new transmission line in 

southwest North Dakota. IERA is considering its first transmission financing, a 

14
$6.5 million bond for an Idaho electric cooperative. SDEIA has funded several resource 

potential and transmission evaluation studies. RETA and CEDA are getting their 

organizations up and running but as noted, they are both engaged with WIA on the High 

Plains Express project. 

V. Issues Facing State Infrastructure Authorities 

To date, state transmission infrastructure authorities have assumed various elements of 

two roles: 1.) a promoter of facilities and transmission projects, and 2.) a participant in 

the planning, development, and financing of transmission projects. State transmission 

infrastructure authorities have also served as early-stage transmission incubators by 

preparing state maps of potential energy resources, identifying transmissions projects to 

access those resources, and shepherding transmission projects through the early 

developmental stages. State transmission infrastructure authorities also have powers with 

respect to siting that other industry entities may lack. They can establish transmission 

corridors; adopt, amend, or repeal bylaws; and most have been granted the power of 

eminent domain within their respective states for project siting purposes. 

Transmission planning and development is a complex process involving many pieces and 

players. The individuals charged with the oversight of state transmission infrastructure 

authorities have found it challenging to fully understand all the issues involved, requiring 

some to learn about transmission projects and ensure that the members of the board of 

directors have a clear picture of what is required. Some state transmission infrastructure 

authorities have hired outside experts to help map the energy resource potential in their 

respective states, examine transmission system constraints, and offer recommendations 

on improvements. SDEIA, for example, has conducted several studies on the 

transmission grid in South Dakota and options for developing coal, wind, and nuclear 

plants, and exporting the power to other states. KETA spent most of its first year 

learning about transmission planning and development issues. 

Clearly identifying where the energy resources are and where the electric demand is 

needed is very important at the outset. Following this, specific projects need to be 

identified, and feasibility and engineering studies conducted. This process has proved to 

be time consuming and costly, taking twice as long and costing twice as much as 

expected.s

 Some authorities have focused on creating public-private partnerships to help 

fund these efforts. 

Funding has been a limiting factor for some state transmission infrastructure authorities. 

WIA has been well funded, with a $1.6 million operating budget for 2007 and 2008, 

giving it the ability to support three full-time staff members, and a $10 million 

 

s National Wind Coordinating Collaborative. (October 2007). Thirteenth NWCC Transmission Update. 

http://www.nationalwind.org/pdf/NWCCtransmissionupdateOct07FINAL.pdf. (Accessed February 12, 

2008).

15
contingency fund for project development.t

 KETA has also been well supported, with 

operational funds totaling $170,000 for 2007 and 2008, and a $1 million contingency 

fund.u

 RETA received $1 million in start-up funding for 2007 and 2008.v SDEIA has 

received a total of $303,000 in funding and NDTA is part of the North Dakota Industrial 

Commission and therefore works under its budget. IERA and CEDA have had the most 

difficulty with respect to funding. IERA did not receive any funding from the legislature, 

but did obtain $50,000 from the Idaho Consumer-Owned Utilities Association to assist 

with start up operations.w The state of Colorado has a constitutional provision that caps 

growth in government spending at the level of inflation, largely preventing the legislature 

from providing any funding to CEDA. Some funding is being provided to CEDA by the 

Colorado Clean Energy Fund, which is part of the existing Governor’s Energy Office that 

facilitates clean energy development in the state. 

These funding issues have limited some of the state transmission infrastructure 

authorities’ abilities to hire staff, conduct feasibility studies, sponsor larger but more 

risky transmission projects, and participate in regional transmission planning initiatives. 

State transmission infrastructure authorities with little or no funding have focused on 

short-term transmission projects that can be put in place quickly and generate some 

revenue. IERA, for example, will soon close on a $6.5 million project to construct a 

transmission line for a rural electric cooperative. While this may generate immediate 

results, not having operational funding makes it initially difficult for a state infrastructure 

authority to participate in a larger transmission project to fund feasibility studies, or to 

take part in regional transmission planning initiatives. 

These funding and bonding differences have resulted in state transmission infrastructure 

authorities choosing to focus their efforts in different ways. WIA has formed 

partnerships with electric utilities and transmission developers to explore development of 

large, multi-state transmission projects. KETA has taken on the role of project catalyst, 

pushing projects forward and then bowing out when private entities express interest and 

assume control of the projects. SDEIA has focused on identifying and cataloguing 

development opportunities in South Dakota. NDTA prefers to act as a facilitator, 

brokering deals between developers and financers. RETA and CDEA are engaged in 

getting their organizations up and running and ensuring their board members are 

informed. 

One issue that unites the state transmission infrastructure authorities is their desire to 

have the bonds they issue exempt from federal taxes. If achieved, such an exemption 

 

t

Wyoming Infrastructure Authority. State of Wyoming 2007-2008 Biennium Budget Request. 

http://www.wyia.org/Pubs/WIA_Budget.htm. (Accessed February 12, 2008).

u Kansas Electric Transmission Authority. (January 2008). 2007 Annual Report to the Governor and the 

Legislature. http://www.accesskansas.org/keta/resources.shtml. (Accessed February 4, 2008). v New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority. Fact Sheet on The Renewable Energy 

Transmission Authority. http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/main/documents/HB-188-RETA-fact-sheet-07.pdf. 

(Accessed February 12, 2008).

w Idaho Energy Resources Authority. (October 2005). Minutes of the Idaho Energy Resources Authority 

Directors’ Meeting, Boise, Idaho.. http://www.iera.info/pdf/minutes_10_26_05.pdf. (Accessed February 

12, 2008).

16
would allow state transmission infrastructure authorities to offer bonds at a 1.5% to 2% 

lower interest rate. WIA has financially supported federal lobbying efforts for such a 

federal tax exemption, but unsuccessfully to date. 

VI. Conclusion and Recommendations 

Although investments in transmission are increasing, transmission investment has lagged 

behind growth in electric demand for many years. Several well-known and welldiscussed obstacles affect transmission development, from high capital investment 

requirements; uncertain cost allocation among multiple parties; and siting and permitting 

challenges. State transmission infrastructure authorities are potentially a new tool for 

helping to develop transmission. These authorities are authorized to issue revenue bonds 

to support investments in, and sometimes ownership in, transmission projects, and in 

some cases, generation, distribution, manufacturing, and transportation projects. State 

transmission infrastructure authorities have brought a focus to transmission that has been 

either absent or has not been sustained over time. This result may not have been 

anticipated when state transmission infrastructure authorities were formed, but has come 

about through regular public meetings of the board of directors and other public outreach 

events. 

Since all of the state transmission infrastructure authorities are less than five years old, 

and transmission development can take years, it is perhaps not surprising that they are 

still evolving. So far, only one state—Wyoming—has issued bonds for a transmission 

line. However, Kansas and North Dakota have also had success in encouraging new 

transmission without issuing bonds. In the case of Kansas, KETA, who can own (but not 

operate) transmission appears to have used that potential threat as a means of cajoling 

private entities to sponsor at least two new transmission projects, the first to be built in 

the state in decades. Wyoming will sponsor an open season for the Wyoming-Colorado 

transmission line in 2008 amidst indications that wind may take up most, if not all, of the 

capacity on the line. 

Yet to be determined is whether state transmission infrastructure authorities can help 

stimulate large, multi-state regional transmission projects. Wyoming has entered into 

joint development agreements for two such projects, the High Plains Express and the 

TransWest Express projects. Although just established in 2007, the Colorado and 

(potentially) the New Mexico authorities plan to participate in High Plains Express, and 

at least in the case of New Mexico, that state’s authority has desires to build transmission 

to export renewable resources from New Mexico to surrounding states. 

Should states contemplate creating a transmission infrastructure authority, they may wish 

to consider the following: 

• Funding. Although other factors undoubtedly come into play, it is perhaps 

no accident that two of the more active state transmission infrastructure 

authorities (Kansas and Wyoming) are among the better-funded. 

17
Adequate funding for both operating costs and for contingencies allows 

state transmission infrastructure authorities to hire sufficient staff, invest 

in early-stage feasibility studies and plans, and build support for largescale transmission projects. Other states, notably Idaho, have been 

successful with minimal funding and relying on consultants acting on a 

“success fee” basis. Making that approach work places more emphasis on 

the short-term and more immediate transmission projects to generate cash 

flow, and does not necessarily allow participation in regional planning 

initiatives or in large-scale, multi-state transmission projects that may take 

several years to develop, if they are developed at all. 

• Independence. Two state transmission infrastructure authorities—

Colorado and South Dakota—require legislative approval before they can 

issue bonds. While legislative oversight is clearly necessary, requiring 

legislative approval for state transmission infrastructure authority bonds 

may introduce uncertainty into the planning and financing of these bonds 

and ultimately slow or even stymie the transmission projects that are to be 

supported. To the extent feasible, states contemplating the establishment 

of state transmission infrastructure authorities may wish to consider 

traditional legislative oversight rather than requiring approval of each 

proposed state transmission infrastructure authority bond. 

• Start Small but Think Big. Planning and developing large-scale 

transmission projects is complex and involves multiple marketparticipants working on complicated technical and economic issues. 

Planning and putting in place a small transmission project initially allows 

state transmission infrastructure authorities to test the market for issuing 

revenue bonds and to become familiar with market participants in their 

state and region. But since a major driver for creating most state 

transmission infrastructure authorities is to create economic development 

by exporting energy (primarily coal and wind) to load centers that may be 

several hundred miles away, state transmission infrastructure authorities 

should also pursue large-scale, multi-state transmission projects. 

• Consider Financial Partnership with Other Entities. WIA has established 

partnerships with National Grid, Trans-Elect, and several electric utilities 

to leverage both financial clout and technical expertise in pursuing largescale, multi-state transmission projects. Such partnerships help minimize 

the financial strain of large-scale transmission projects and also have the 

benefit of building market participant support for large-scale transmission 

projects as well. 

• Consider Allowing Ownership of Transmission Facilities. Some state 

laws creating transmission infrastructure authorities require the authorities 

to divest transmission assets as soon as economically practicable. WIA, 

KETA, RETA, and IERA are allowed to own (with conditions) 

18
transmission facilities over the long term, and although other factors are 

certainly involved, the implicit threat of competition for transmission 

facilities appears to have helped stimulate several new transmission 

projects in Kansas. Allowing other entities to assume project development 

within a defined time period after a state transmission infrastructure 

authority announces interest in developing a transmission project may help 

mitigate concerns about unfair competition or market interference by 

government entities. 

19
COLORADO 

I. Legislation 

Name: Colorado Clean Energy Development Authority 

Legislation: House Bill 07-1150 

 http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/Clics2007A/csl.nsf/MainBills?openFrameset

Date Enacted: May 2007 

Governed by: Independent State Instrumentality 

Administered: Nine-member Board 

Reports to: Governor; Agriculture, Natural Resources and Energy Committee of the 

 Senate, and Transportation and Energy Committee of the House 

Financing Cap: None 

Phone: 303-866-2100 

Fax: 303-866-2930 

Web site: http://www.colorado.gov/energy/utilities/clean-energy-developmentauthority.asp

Contact: Tom Plant, tom.plant@state.co.us 

Morey Wolfson, morey.wolfson@state.co.us

 303-866-2401 

Summary 

The Colorado Clean Energy Development Authority (CEDA) is a stand-alone entity created for 

the purpose of facilitating the production and consumption of clean energy. CEDA may finance 

projects located within or outside the state for the production, transportation, transmission, 

equipment manufacturing, and storage of clean energy, including pipelines, and related 

supporting infrastructure. CEDA provides project financing and development support but cannot 

own facilities. Clean energy is defined as: biodiesel; biomass; landfill gas; ethanol; non-fossilfueled fuel cells; zero-emissions generation technology; renewables including (but not limited to) 

solar, wind, and geothermal; and certain clean coal demonstration technologies. CEDA may also 

support non-clean energy transportation and storage projects as long as the project is expected to 

produce or utilize primarily clean energy within five years of becoming operational, or for a 

transmission project, the primary purpose is to transmit clean energy. 

CEDA is governed by a nine-member board and is authorized to maintain offices and hire an 

Executive Director and other staff as it deems necessary. CEDA can also: 

• Adopt, amend, or repeal bylaws 

• Finance and refinance projects 

• Issue revenue bonds pursuant to its own resolutions, though each issuance must first be 

approved by the legislature and some issuances may require a public vote 

• Enter contracts and agreements; make loans; receive aid, grants, and contributions; and 

borrow funds to establish itself. 

 A-1
The bonds issued and managed by CEDA are not obligations of the state and all CEDA facilities 

and revenues are exempt from state and local taxes. 

House Bill 07-1150 directs CEDA to convene an advisory panel that will make 

recommendations on whether hydroelectric power should be included under clean energy; 

whether and what restrictions should be adopted for biomass; and whether integrated gasification 

combined cycle generation facilities or other clean coal technologies with carbon sequestration 

should be considered clean energy projects. CEDA is to convene the panel when sufficient 

funding has been received from gifts, grants, donations, or project fees. CEDA is required to 

submit an annual report to the Governor and various committees of the General Assembly 

outlining activities and expenditures by February 1st of each year, and to prepare a three-year 

plan every three years beginning in February 2008. 

II. Organization Size and Structure 

CEDA is a stand-alone entity governed by a nine-member board of directors. Four of these 

members are ex officio: State Treasurer, Director of the Colorado Office of Economic 

Development, Commissioner of Agriculture, and Director of the Governor’s Energy Office who 

will also serve as the Chairperson. Five board members are appointees serving staggered fouryear terms. One board member will be appointed by each of the following: Governor, Speaker of 

the House of Representatives, President of the Senate, Minority Leader of the House of 

Representatives, and Minority Leader of the Senate. The board members will elect from among 

them a vice-chairperson and a secretary. CEDA plans to hire an Executive Director in 2008. The 

appointees were announced in September 2007 and are as follows: 

• Tom Plant, Chairman, Governor’s Energy Office 

• Cary Kennedy, State Treasurer 

• John Stulp, Agriculture Commissioner 

• Don Elliman, Director of the Office of Economic Development 

• Lola Spradley, Former House Speaker 

• Lee White, George K. Baum & Co. 

• Sam Weaver, Cool Energy 

• Jeff Nathanson, National Jewish Hospital 

• Joel Bladow, Tri-State Generation and Transmission 

III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

CEDA can finance projects involved in the production and transport of all clean energy, which 

includes all renewable resources and all zero-emission technologies. CEDA can explore clean 

coal technology demonstration projects that include carbon capture and sequestration. The 

definition of transport includes electric transmission, pipelines, containers, rails, and trucks. 

CEDA may also support biomass resources projects that use energy that is not clean in the 

production, transportation, or storage of clean energy so long as the project is designed and 

expected to produce only clean energy within five years of becoming operational. Transmission 

projects may also transmit non-clean energy as long as the principle purpose of the project is to 

 A-2
provide for transmission of clean energy. Similarly, storage and transportation projects may be 

used for non-clean energy as long as the project is designed and is expected to be used primarily 

for clean energy within five years of becoming operational. 

IV. Financing 

CEDA may request and receive loans from the state government for funding the start-up of its 

facilities and operations. CEDA is receiving some start-up funding from the Colorado 

Clean Energy Fund. A separate fund for CEDA was created within the Treasury by House Bill 

07-1150, however, CEDA is not a governmental entity, and therefore could not spend money 

from the fund. Clean-up legislation was introduced in the 2008 legislative solution to remedy this 

problem. CEDA can issue revenue bonds, though they must first be approved by the legislature, 

and will pay for those bonds out of revenues it derives from its projects. Voter approval of 

CEDA bonds is necessary if CEDA is not able to realize sufficient revenues to cover the bond 

payments due unless the bond payments are secured by a third-party financing agreement or 

reserve fund, or by a mortgage on the facilities. 

The CEDA bonds are not liabilities of the state and there are, currently, no financial limits on the 

amount of bonds the CEDA may issue. However, scheduled bond repayments cannot exceed $8 

million in any single fiscal year. CEDA may plan and pursue projects at its own discretion, has 

not been directed to issue RFPs, and is not required to advertise intent to pursue a project. CEDA 

must, however, submit to the General Assembly by January 15th each year a list of the proposed 

projects for which it is seeking legislative approval prior to entering into a financing agreement. 

House Bill 07-1150 granted pre-authorized financing in each year for the following: $40 million 

in bonds for wind projects and $25 million in bonds for solar projects. For all other projects, the 

Authority must gain approval from the Assembly prior to issuing the bonds. 

CEDA cannot finance or refinance any transmission or clean energy project that is subject to 

regulation by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission without approval from the Commission. 

For projects with debt reserve requirements, CEDA must obtain a performance bond to guarantee 

completion of the project. Should debt reserve requirements fall below minimally required 

levels, the Governor can request legislative funding on behalf of CEDA. 

V. Activities to Date 

CEDA has joined the High Plains Express transmission project, which is developing a highvoltage system from northeast Wyoming heading south through eastern Colorado to New 

Mexico and Arizona. In addition to CEDA, Trans-Elect, the Western Area Power 

Administration, Salt River Project, Public Service Company of New Mexico, Xcel Energy, 

Colorado Springs Utilities, Platte River Power Authority, Tri-State Generation and Transmission 

Association, and the Wyoming Infrastructure Authority are also involved. The New Mexico 

Renewable Energy Transmission Authority is also considering participating in the project. 

Phase I consists of preliminary engineering and economic studies, and was completed in early 

2008 showing positive benefits arising from the project. As a result, the project has moved to 

Phase II, the development stage, consisting of defining the project, ownership negotiations, 

studies on siting and economics, review of commercial issues, and addressing regulatory and 

 A-3
policy issues. The project consists of two 500 kV lines with 3,500 MW of capacity connecting 

four other transmission projects already under development into an integrated grid. These other 

projects are the Wyoming-Colorado Intertie, Eastern Plains Transmission Project, SunZia, and a 

New Mexico wind collector project. The project is expected to cost $5.13 billion. 

 A-4
IDAHO 

I. Legislation 

Name: Idaho Energy Resources Authority 

Legislation: House Bill 106 

 http://www3.state.id.us/oasis/2005/H0106.html

Amendments: Senate Bill 1192 

 http://www3.state.id.us/oasis/2005/S1192.html

House Bill 32 

 http://www3.state.id.us/oasis/H0032.html#engr

Date Enacted: March 2005 

Date Amended: April 2005 

March 2007 

Governed by: Independent Public Corporation 

Administered: Seven-member Board 

Reports to: Idaho Legislature and Governor 

Financing Cap: None 

Phone: 208-344-3873 

Fax: 208-344-0077 

Web site: http://www.iera.info/index.html 

Contact: Ron Williams, ron@williamsbradbury.com

208-344-6633 

Summary 

The Idaho Energy Resources Authority (IERA) was created in 2005 for the purpose of 

promoting the development and financing of electric generation and transmission facilities 

in Idaho for the benefit of Idaho utilities and consumers. About 50%of the electricity 

consumed in Idaho is imported, and the Idaho Legislature believed that infrastructure 

investment is necessary to provide adequate reserves, maintain reliability, and reduce 

market volatility. IERA is focused on providing electricity at cost-based rates through 

promoting the development and financing of generation and transmission facilities for 

participating utilities. Participating utilities are defined as any public or private 

corporation, cooperative, municipal corporation, political subdivision, government agency, 

or joint operating entity that: 

• Owns and operates an electric utility system with customers in a service area within 

Idaho 

• Provides electric generation, power supply, transmission, or ancillary related 

services to a participating utility 

• Is organized or operates as a regional transmission organization that includes all or 

part of Idaho and one or more states. 

The IERA is an independent public corporation governed by a seven-member board of 

directors serving five-year terms. The IERA can help plan, finance, construct, develop, 

 B-1
acquire, maintain, and operate electric generation, distribution, and transmission facilities, 

and any supporting infrastructure. IERA cannot develop or finance a facility unless it has a 

contractual arrangement with a participating utility. Once the facility is completed, it must 

be managed by a participating utility or another party under contract. IERA was given the 

authority to: 

• Adopt relevant bylaws 

• Maintain offices and staff, and employ consultants, attorneys, or other professionals 

• Execute contracts and sue or be sued 

• Acquire, own, lease, and dispose of real or personal property in connection with 

generation and transmission facilities 

• Acquire, construct, renovate, maintain, operate, and lease generation, distribution, 

and transmission facilities 

• Enter into contracts for fuel supplies and sell or lease output from generation, 

distribution, and transmission facilities to one or more participating utilities 

• Borrow money and issue revenue bonds 

• Make loans to participating utilities to finance the cost of transmission, distribution, 

and generation facilities 

• Establish rules and regulations for the use of generation, distribution, and 

transmission facilities, and to designate a participating utility as IERA’s agent 

• To assign and pledge all or part of IERA’s revenues and income, or mortgage any 

or all of IERA’s generation, distribution and transmission facilities for bondholders 

to enable bond financing 

• Participate in cooperative ventures with any agencies or organizations 

• Establish and collect rents and fees from its facilities to pay for the facility and 

bond costs. 

IERA is permitted to use revenues from its bonds to pay for its operating expenses. 

Facilities owned by IERA are exempt from state taxes. IERA also must submit an annual 

report to the Governor and the Legislature. 

IERA has eminent domain authority for securing real or personal property, although it is 

limited for generation and transmission facilities and cannot use eminent domain for 

obtaining utility assets. IERA is also prohibited from providing financing for acquiring 

utility assets by or via the threat of eminent domain and from providing electricity at retail 

to Idaho customers. 

The statute encourages IERA to involve multiple utilities on a joint and cooperative basis, 

and IERA is required to offer all utilities a chance to participate in developing or 

purchasing the output of a generation, distribution, and transmission facility. IERA cannot 

proceed with a project unless it has a contract with at least one utility or, in the case of a 

renewable generation facility, a utility or an independent power producer. Upon final 

payment of the bonds, IERA is required to convey ownership of the generation, 

distribution, or transmission facility to the participating utility or utilities, unless these 

utilities request IERA to keep ownership of the facility on their behalf. 

 B-2
A month after the initial legislation passed, the Idaho Legislature amended the statute to 

allow independent power producers to seek bond funding from IERA for renewable energy 

generation projects. In 2007, IERA’s authority was further expanded to include 

development and funding for electric distribution systems, along with generation and 

transmission. It also grants IERA the ability to manage and operate its own facilities, and 

grants permission to the State Treasurer to invest in IERA bonds. 

II. Organization Size and Structure 

A seven-member board appointed by the governor to five-year terms governs the IERA. 

Directors can serve no more than two consecutive terms. The board members are listed 

below. 

• E. Robert Mooney, Malacha Hydro, Chairman 

• N. Charles Hedemark, formerly of Intermountain Gas Company 

• Darrell Wayne Kerby, City of Bonners Ferry and Pace-Kerby & Co., Inc. 

• John V. Evans, Sr., Former Governor of Idaho 

• Ralph Williams, United Electric Cooperative, Inc. 

• Larry A. Crowley, The Energy Strategies Institute 

• Randolph J. Hill, Washington Group International 

III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

IERA may be involved with all aspects of energy projects including generation, 

transmission, distribution, and fuel supply management. This gives the IERA a large 

amount of discretion in selecting projects to finance. The IERA act includes a provision 

allowing IERA to finance renewable energy projects for the benefit of independent power 

producers as well as participating utilities. Technologies defined as renewable energy 

include biomass, fuel cells, geothermal energy, waste heat, cogeneration, solar energy, 

waterpower, and wind. Nonrenewable energy projects can only be financed for the benefit 

of participating utilities. 

IV. Funding and Financing 

The IERA has the authority to issue revenue bonds, make secured and unsecured loans, 

and borrow money to finance projects. Bonds are issued through resolutions of the board 

and are obligations of the IERA and not the state of Idaho. Bonds issued by the IERA are 

exempt from Idaho income taxes. No financing cap has been set. IERA can also purchase 

or refinance outstanding bonds as they see necessary. 

The IERA does not receive any funding from the state of Idaho and does not yet have fulltime staff. IERA is expected to finance its own operations through the revenue received 

from its bonds. In 2006, the IERA received $50,000 from the Idaho Consumer-Owned 

Utilities Association for operational funding. IERA will not have full-time staff until 

financing or loan transactions generate enough income for IERA to have staff. In the 

interim, IERA is relying on part-time staff and other professionals such as lawyers, 

lenders, and financial advisors on a deferred or success-fee basis. In the near term, this 

 B-3
will mean focusing on projects with a high probability of success and low risk in order to 

make the best use of the consultants and other professionals, and to generate revenue to 

support IERA’s operations. The IERA recently hired Lehman Brothers to act as an 

investment banker. 

Subject to approval by the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, a utility that is part of an 

IERA generation or transmission project may establish one or more rate stabilization, cost 

recovery, or power cost adjustment charges in regards to a generation, distribution, or 

transmission facility sponsored by the IERA. A utility not subject to jurisdiction by the 

Idaho Public Utilities Commission may also establish such charges provided notice of at 

least 15 days is given and a public hearing is held. 

V. Activities to Date 

IERA submitted its first annual report in March 2007. The report outlines IERA’s key 

goals developed in a statement of purpose as follows: 

• Seek high-quality utility-related generation and transmission projects that the IERA 

deems to be of high-value and low-risk 

• Build a successful loan portfolio and issue bonds to finance new transmission lines 

and facilities or to expand existing facilities required to support new generation or 

greater transfers from other regions 

• Own transmission facilities in those instances where private investment is not 

offered or available, or is not the lowest cost alternative 

• Enter into partnerships with public or private entities to finance the construction or 

upgrading of transmission facilities. 

The IERA did not fund any projects in 2006 and has no bonds outstanding as of December 

2006. However, IERA’s annual report lists a number of projects as being under 

consideration. These include: 

• Bogus Basin Transmission Line. Refinancing, at a cost of $2.5 million, of the 69 

kV transmission line from Idaho Power’s substation at Hidden Springs to serve 

Bogus Basin Ski Area and broadcasters at Deer Point above Boise 

• Raft River Duck Valley Transmission Line. Permanent financing of the 138 kV 

transmission line from the C J Strike substation of Idaho Power to the Duck Valley 

Indian Reservation served by Raft River Electric 

• Caribou Transmission Line. Financing of a tap of the 115 kV Rocky Mountain 

Power (PacifiCorp) Bridger Transmission Line near Soda Springs, Idaho, to the 

Lower Valley Energy (LVL) substation in Afton, Wyoming. The estimated cost is 

$15 million. Financing of the LVL transmission and substation facilities is only 

contemplated at this time, but possible inclusion of the Rocky Mountain Power 

facilities is possible and would triple the scope of the financing. 

 B-4
• Intermountain Power Project. IERA plans to contribute about $150 million in 

construction financing to help municipal and cooperative utilities buy partownership of the proposed 900 MW Intermountain Power Project Unit #3, a 900 

MW coal plant being developed in Utah. Various utilities participating in the 

project have threatened to sue the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 

and the Intermountain Power Agency for withdrawing from the project, although 

the parties are in the midst of discussions. Assuming the parties can reach a 

resolution, construction may begin in 2008 and the plant could come online in 

2012. 

• Idaho Falls Municipal Loop. This consists of a 161 kV transmission loop to extend 

a transmission ring around Idaho Falls, Idaho, at an estimated cost of $10 million. 

Several other municipalities and cooperatives are interested in a joint bond issuance 

for distribution financing. 

 B-5
KANSAS 

I. Legislation 

Name: Kansas Electric Transmission Authority 

Legislation: Kansas House Bill 2263 

 http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2006/2263.pdf

Amendment: Kansas House Bill 2306 

http://www.accesskansas.org/keta/Legislation/2007_2306.pdf

Statutes Codified: K.S.A 74-99d01, et. seq.

 http://www.accesskansas.org/keta/Legislation/Statutes.pdf

Date Enacted: March 2005 

Date Amended: April 2007 

Governed by: Independent Public Corporation 

Administered: Seven-member board 

Reports to: Kansas Legislature and Governor 

Financing Cap: None 

Phone: 785-296-4408 

Web site: http://www.accesskansas.org/keta/

Contact: keta@ink.org

Rep. Carl D. Holmes, repcarl@aol.com

 620-624-7361 

Summary 

The stated purpose of creating the Kansas Electric Transmission Authority (KETA) is “to 

further ensure reliable operation of the integrated electrical transmission system, diversify 

and expand the Kansas economy and facilitate the consumption of Kansas energy through 

improvements in the state’s electric transmission infrastructure.” KETA is an independent 

entity administered by a seven-member board of directors. KETA is authorized to adopt 

bylaws, employ staff, make and execute contracts, borrow funds, and own property. KETA 

can also incur or assume debt and enter into contracts with the Kansas Development 

Finance Authority to provide for project financing. State and local governments can also 

lease, lend, grant, or convey property to KETA without public notice. 

KETA can recover costs through tariffs of the Southwest Power Pool (SPP) regional 

transmission organization and participate in and coordinate with the planning activities of 

SPP and adjoining regional transmission organizations. KETA can plan for, finance, 

construct and own transmission facilities, and participate in joint ventures but cannot 

operate or maintain facilities. The Board is required to operate and maintain its 

transmission lines via contract with utilities. KETA also has the right to exercise the 

power of eminent domain, if necessary, for constructing, upgrading, or repairing electric 

transmission facilities. KETA and its facilities are exempt from state taxes, except property 

taxes. 

 C-1
II. Organization Size and Structure 

KETA is governed by a seven-member board of directors serving staggered, four-year 

terms. The Governor appoints three of the board members, subject to State Senate 

confirmation. The other four members are state legislators acting on an ex officio basis and 

consist of the two Chairs and the two ranking minority party members of the House and 

Senate Utilities Committees. The current board members as of July 2007 are: 

• Representative Carl Holmes, Chair 

• Earnie Lehman, Midwest Energy, Vice-Chair 

• Tim McKee, Triplett Woolf & Garretson LLC, Secretary 

• Senator Jay Emler 

• Les Evans, Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. 

• Representative Annie Kuether 

• Senator Janis Lee 

The chairperson, vice-chairperson, and secretary are elected annually. 

III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

The scope of KETA’s authority is defined by legislation as being applicable only to 

electric transmission facilities or related supporting infrastructure. There are no restrictions 

in the legislation as to what types of resources or technology KETA may pursue to build 

electric transmission lines. 

IV. Funding and Financing 

During state fiscal years 2007 and 2008, KETA’s operations are financed from the Public 

Service Regulation Fund pursuant to legislative appropriation. KETA has been provided 

with part-time staff by the Kansas Legislative Research Department and the Kansas 

Corporation Commission (KCC). KETA’s authorized expenditure limitation for FY 2007 

was $70,000. For FY 2008 the legislatively established expenditure limitation for KETA 

was $100,000. KETA has also received authorization to expend up to $1 million from a 

special fund established by the Legislature for planning related to transmission projects. 

KETA is authorized to borrow funds and to contract with the Kansas Development 

Finance Authority, which can borrow money, issue revenue bonds, and provide financing 

for KETA projects. KETA may recover project costs, including amounts necessary to 

repay loans and bonds, through tariffs of SPP and additionally through assessments levied 

by the KCC against all electric utilities, municipal utilities, and rural electric cooperatives 

in Kansas. KETA is exempt from state income and sales taxes, and pays the same 

property tax rate as privately-owned and cooperatively-owned utilities. 

KETA is authorized to plan and develop infrastructure projects but must work with SPP 

and can only sponsor facilities which SPP has determined are compatible with SPP’s 

transmission plan. If KETA is considering a project it must first advertise its intentions, 

giving other entities 90 days to provide the Board with notification of intent to finance and 

 C-2
construct the project. KETA may continue with the project if no private entity comes 

forward. Any entity that has expressed intent to undertake the project identified by KETA 

then has 180 days to commence performance of the project. If the private entity does not 

commence performance, KETA may proceed with the project. KETA is not required to 

divest itself of projects it has developed and may continue to own the facilities. If 

financing can be acquired, KETA also has the ability to build transmission projects that are 

not currently economic but may be economic over the long term or may be necessary to 

ensure future reliability. If projects do not recover revenue requirements through SPP 

tariffs, revenue shortfalls can be allocated amongst ratepayers in all of Kansas. KETA may 

also finance projects that extend into other states on the condition that 51% of the project 

cost is for facilities located in Kansas. In the case of a project that extends across the state 

boundary, the KCC must certify that the portion of the project located outside the state will 

benefit the state. 

V. Activities to Date 

KETA has been actively involved in identifying and supporting electric transmission 

development in Kansas. After many years during which transmission capacity in Kansas 

was not significantly expanded or upgraded, the following projects have been proposed or 

have started construction since KETA began operations: 

• WAPA/Eastern Plains Transmission Project. This project consists of 1,000 miles 

of new transmission lines at a cost of $1 billion that is scheduled to be completed 

by 2010/2011 and would connect two proposed new 700 MW coal-fired power 

plants in Holcomb, Kansas to the Colorado electric transmission grid. The project 

consists of an integrated grid of new 500 kV and 345 kV lines throughout Kansas 

and Colorado, two new substations, and several substation upgrades. As of early 

2008, the Kansas portion of the transmission project is in doubt because the Kansas 

Department of Health and Environment declined to issue a required air quality 

permit for the proposed Holcomb generation plants based on concerns about carbon 

dioxide emissions. 

• X Plan. A $419 million project adding two new transmission lines: the SpearvilleMooreland-Oklahoma City 345 kV line and the Wichita-Moorland-Potter City 345 

kV line. SPP and KETA studied the cost-effectiveness of various line 

configurations related to the X-Plan. In May 2007, KETA expressed interest in the 

following line segments within Kansas: 345 kV lines from Spearville to Reno and 

from Spearville to Knoll. ITC Great Plains subsequently announced its intent to 

construct and operate a new transmission line with capacity of at least 345 kV from 

Spearville to a new substation in Comanche County and on to an interconnection 

close to Wichita. This line is equivalent to the Spearville to Reno segment 

examined by KETA in its initial feasibility study. 

• Proposed Kansas Nebraska Plan. This project consists of a new 345 kV line from 

Spearville north to Knoll and on to Axtell, Nebraska. In August 2007, KETA 

announced intent to proceed with the Spearville to Knoll to Axtell 345 kV line. 

During the statutorily required 90-day period during which private entities may 

 C-3
formally provide notification of intent to construct the project, ITC Great Plains 

announced its intent to construct and operate the line. In accordance with its 

authorizing statute, KETA will monitor ITC’s progress on this project. 

• Central Kansas Projects. KETA is monitoring the progress of several other 

transmission improvement projects within central Kansas. As of December 2007, 

these projects are in various stages of development as listed below: 

• Wichita-Reno 345 kV line – KCC granted permits to Westar Energy 

• Reno-Summit 345 kV line – KCC granted permits to Westar 

Energy 

• Rose Hill (Kansas) - Sooner (Oklahoma) 345 kV line – Westar 

 Energy has indicated that it intends to build the Kansas portion of 

 this line 

• Knoll-S Hays-Heizer 230 kV line – conversion of existing 115 kV 

line is underway by Midwest Energy. 

 C-4
NEW MEXICO 

I. Legislation 

Name: New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority 

Legislation: House Bill 188 

 http://legis.state.nm.us/sessions/07%20regular/bills/house/hb0188.html 

Date Enacted: March 5, 2007 

Governed by: Independent Public Corporation 

Administered: Eight-member Renewable Energy Transmission Authority Board 

Reports to: Legislature and Governor 

Financing Cap: None 

Phone: 505-476-3200 

Fax: 505-476-3220 

Web site: http://www.nmreta.org

Contact: Lisa A. Szot, lszot@nmfa.net

 505-992-9627 

Summary 

The New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority (RETA) was created to 

expand renewable energy transmission and storage projects both within New Mexico and 

for export. The projects undertaken by RETA must source at least 30% of their energy 

from renewable energy sources defined as solar, wind, hydropower, and geothermal; or 

fuel cells that are not fossil-fueled; and biomass. Biomass is further defined as agriculture 

or animal waste, small diameter timber, salt cedar and other vegetation from river basins or 

watersheds in New Mexico, landfill gas, and anaerobic digestion of waste. 

RETA is a stand-alone entity administered by an eight-member board. Five members are 

appointed and serve staggered three-year terms, and three members are government 

representatives. RETA is authorized to hire staff, make and execute agreements, and enter 

into partnerships with public or private entities. RETA can also identify and establish 

corridors for the transmission of electricity within the state; participate in regional 

transmission forums to plan and negotiate for the creation of interstate transmission 

corridors; finance or plan, acquire, maintain, and operate eligible facilities; and exercise 

the power of eminent domain to forward development of its projects, as long as utility 

property is not taken and electric reliability is not materially diminished as determined by 

the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission. 

RETA can also enter into contracts for leasing RETA-owned facilities, as long as the 

revenue is deposited into a renewable-energy transmission bonding fund. RETA can also 

enter into contracts to lease or operate transmission facilities that are owned by other 

parties. RETA can issue revenue bonds to finance projects and collect payments from the 

use of eligible facilities to finance payment of the revenue bonds. Finally, RETA may 

borrow money and mortgage and pledge any leases, loans, or contracts entered into by 

RETA. 

 D-1
RETA must provide an annual report to the Governor and the Legislature by December 1st

of each year. RETA issued its first report in 2007. In addition, the New Mexico Finance 

Authority Oversight Committee monitors and oversees RETA. The Committee will review 

and provide assistance and advice to RETA on proposed projects. RETA is required to 

provide financial reports to the Committee on a quarterly basis. The Committee will meet 

regularly to review statutes, constitutional provisions, regulations and court decisions 

governing energy transmission and renewable energy development and will annually report 

its findings and any recommended changes or legislation to the Governor, the New Mexico 

Public Regulation Commission, and the Legislature by December 15th of each year. 

II. Organization Size and Structure 

RETA is governed by an eight-member board. Three members are appointed by the 

Governor; one member is appointed by the New Mexico Speaker of the House of 

Representatives; and one member is appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the New 

Mexico Senate. Three additional members are state officials: the State Treasurer or 

designee, the State Investment Officer or designee, and the Secretary of the Energy, 

Minerals, and Natural Resources Department Cabinet Secretary, with the Secretary acting 

as a non-voting member. 

The members of the board are expected to be knowledgeable on renewable energy 

development and the electric industry. One of the Governor’s appointed board members 

should have a background in the financing of electric transmission projects. In no case is a 

board member to represent anyone that owns or operates facilities. 

On August 21, 2007, the Governor announced the following board member designations: 

• Robert E. Busch, Public Service Enterprise Group Services Corp. (retired), Chair 

• Ned Farquhar, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) 

• Steven S. Michel, Western Resource Advocates 

• Beatriz (Betty) Rivera, Energy Resource Associates LLC 

• Robert (Bob) McNeil, El Paso Electric Co. (retired) 

• State Treasurer James Lewis or his designee Mark Valdez 

• State Investment Officer or his designee Paul Blanchard 

• Joanna Prukop, Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Cabinet Secretary 

(ex officio), Secretary 

RETA is authorized to hire staff as required. In December 2007, RETA announced that 

Lisa Szot, former executive at BP, had accepted the position of Executive Director. 

Ms. Szot will be assessing RETA’s administrative needs and hiring any required staff later 

in 2008. 

III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

RETA may only sponsor electric transmission infrastructure projects that have at least 30% 

of the energy sourced from renewables. Eligible resources include solar, wind, 

 D-2
hydropower, geothermal, fuel cells that are not fossil fueled, biomass resources 

(agricultural waste, animal waste, small diameter timber, salt cedar and other phreatophyte 

or woody vegetation removed from river basins or watersheds), landfill gas, and 

anaerobically digested waste biomass. RETA can also fund clean energy storage projects, 

such as compressed air storage for wind power. Any projects related to or affecting in-state 

retail electricity supply or reliability must first be approved by the New Mexico Regulation 

Commission. 

IV. Funding and Financing 

RETA has received a $1 million general fund appropriation as start-up money for 2007 and 

2008. RETA may issue and sell revenue bonds, known as Renewable Energy Transmission 

Bonds. These bonds are payable solely from the Renewable Energy Transmission Bonding 

Fund. The net proceeds from the bonds are to be used by the authority for financing or 

acquiring eligible facilities. Renewable Energy Transmission Bonds are exempt from New 

Mexico state or local taxes. 

The Renewable Energy Transmission Bonding Fund was established to receive revenues 

collected by RETA from operating or leasing eligible facilities; fees and service charges; 

and, if the authority has provided financing for eligible facilities, payments of principal and 

interest on loans. Currently, no financing cap has been established for RETA. RETA may 

issue and sell bonds to refund outstanding renewable energy transmission bonds, through 

public or private sale, if RETA considers it to be in the interest of the state. 

RETA is prohibited from pursuing a project that utilities or other entities are implementing 

or performing. Before committing to a project, RETA must provide notice to each New 

Mexico utility and the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, as well as make 

information available on RETA’s Web site and publish a notice in a newspaper of general 

circulation in New Mexico and in a newspaper where the RETA’s proposed facility would 

be located. The notice must describe RETA’s proposed project, the existing or expected 

renewable energy sources, the names of all people that are or will develop and/or own the 

renewable energy sources, the peak output capacity, source type, location, and expected 

online date of the renewable energy sources. A challenge may be filed to RETA’s 

determination that eligible facilities are involved, and RETA is required to hold a public 

hearing no later than 30 days after receiving the challenge. After the hearing, RETA rules 

on eligibility, and that ruling is subject to appeal to the New Mexico District Court. 

Following 90 days from a notice by RETA or from RETA’s determination of eligibility, an 

entity may express intent to pursue the project. That entity has 12 months to demonstrate 

progress towards developing the project. Actively pursuing federal, state, local, or private 

permits is considered progress under the 12-month timetable, as long as pursuit of those 

permits is ongoing. If no interest or progress is demonstrated, RETA may move forward 

with the project. 

RETA is not allowed to own or control facilities unless: 

• They are leased to a public utility or other entity approved by the New Mexico 

Public Regulation Commission 

 D-3
• The operation, maintenance, and use of the facilities are by a public utility or other 

entity approved by the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission 

• RETA owns or controls the facilities for not over 180 days after the end of a 

leasing or operations and maintenance contract or RETA gains possession as a 

result of a breach of contract or bankruptcy procedures 

• The facilities do not affect in-state retail rates or electric reliability. 

Electric utilities may recover costs of a transmission project under the New Mexico 

Renewable Energy Transmission Authority Act if the transmission project has received a 

certificate of public convenience and necessity from the New Mexico Public Regulation 

Commission, if the costs are considered prudent and if the project is determined to be used 

and useful. Municipal utilities not subject to regulation by the New Mexico Public 

Regulation Commission can recover costs if the municipal utility’s governing body grants 

approval. 

V. Activities to Date 

RETA released its first annual report for 2007. The report outlines the discussions 

conducted at the three board meetings held in October, November, and December. The 

report notes that public comments have been very informative especially from New 

Mexico ranchers who are struggling to find ways to decide amongst the many competing 

wind development offers they receive on their lands. The difficulty arises from a lack of 

knowledge concerning future transmission availability. The ranchers hope RETA will be 

able to provide a picture of transmission plans in the region that could deliver wind 

development on their lands to markets. The report also mentions that the RETA board had 

avoided making any major expenditures in anticipation of the Executive Director coming 

on board. With the new Executive Director on board, RETA is developing criteria for 

assessing projects that are brought forward for review along with working closely with 

stakeholders and the public on designating corridors in New Mexico. 

RETA is contemplating joining the High Plains Express Project, which is developing a 

high voltage system from northeast Wyoming heading south through eastern Colorado to 

New Mexico and Arizona. The parties currently involved with this project are Trans-Elect, 

WAPA, Salt River Project, PNM, Xcel Energy, Colorado Springs Utilities, Platte River 

Power Authority, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, the Colorado Clean 

Energy Development Authority, and the Wyoming Infrastructure Authority. Phase I, 

consisting of preliminary engineering and economic studies, was completed in early 2008 

and showed positive benefits arising from the project. As a result, the project has moved on 

to Phase II, the development stage, consisting of defining the project, ownership 

negotiations, studies on siting and economics, review of commercial issues, and addressing 

regulatory and policy issues. The project consists of two 500 kV lines with 3,500 MW of 

capacity connecting four other transmission projects already under development into an 

integrated grid. These other projects are the Wyoming-Colorado Intertie, Eastern Plains 

Transmission Project, SunZia, and a New Mexico wind collector project. The project is 

expected to cost $5.13 billion. 

 D-4
NORTH DAKOTA 

I. Legislation 

Name: North Dakota Transmission Authority 

Legislation: House Bill No. 1169 

 http://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/59-2005/bill-text/FRAB0300.pdf

Date Enacted: January 4, 2005 

Governed by: North Dakota Industrial Commission 

Administered: Sandi Tabor, Acting Director 

Reports to: North Dakota Department of Agriculture 

Financing Cap: $800 million 

Phone: 701-328-3722 

Fax: 701-328-2820 

Web site: None 

Contact: ndda@nd.gov

Summary 

The North Dakota Transmission Authority (NDTA) is intended to diversify and expand the 

North Dakota economy by facilitating development of transmission in support of the 

production, transportation, and consumption of electricity sourced in North Dakota. NDTA 

is part of the North Dakota Industrial Commission and can (among other things): 

• Offer grants or loans and provide other forms of financial assistance 

• Execute contracts 

• Borrow money and issue bonds 

• Accept aid, grants, or contributions 

• Plan, finance, develop, acquire, own in whole or in part, lease, rent, and sell or 

divest electric transmission facilities 

• Enter into contracts to construct, maintain, and operate electric transmission 

facilities 

• Investigate, plan, prioritize, and propose corridors for electricity transmission 

• Confer with the North Dakota Public Service Commission, other state or federal 

authorities, and/or regional transmission organizations 

• Work to establish rates, fees, or tariffs for transmission facilities and service 

offered by the NDTA, in consultation with and subject to the approval by the North 

Dakota Public Service Commission. 

Any transmission facilities financed and/or constructed by NDTA are exempt from 

property taxes for up to five years. After five years, transmission facilities over 230 kV are 

still exempt from property taxes but are taxed at a per-mile rate. 

 E-1
II. Organization Size and Structure 

NDTA is a part of and governed by the North Dakota Industrial Commission. Sandi Tabor 

is the Acting Director. 

III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

The NDTA is limited to electric transmission facilities. 

IV. Funding and Financing 

NDTA is a part of the North Dakota Industrial Commission and works under the 

Commission budget. With prior authorization from the Industrial Commission, NDTA may 

issue revenue bonds up to a maximum of $800 million. The bonds are payable from 

revenues received by the NDTA from transmission facilities, services and activities, and do 

not constitute a debt of the state. NDTA may also accept loans and grants, and establish 

and maintain a reserve fund. NDTA does not receive a fiscal appropriation from the North 

Dakota Legislature; financing comes from the revenue bonds that NDTA issues. 

Before constructing a facility itself, NDTA is required to advertise the project and request 

submissions of notice of intent from other entities. Other organizations have 180 days to 

submit a notice of intent to build the facility. The NDTA may require a bond, a 

development plan, and a timetable. If no notices are received, then NDTA can proceed 

with the project itself. If such a notice of intent is received, the NDTA can still proceed if it 

decides doing so is in the public interest, based on economic impact to the state, economic 

feasibility, technical performance, reliability, past performance, and the probability of 

successful competition and operation. 

NDTA views itself as a developer of last resort, but is allowed to own or partly own 

transmission facilities, though it must sell its ownership as soon as economically prudent. 

Before taking ownership, the NDTA must develop a plan that documents the public 

purpose of owning a transmission facility, the circumstances where ownership by the 

NDTA is no longer required, and a plan to sell the NDTA’s ownership as soon as 

economically feasible. 

V. Activities to Date 

The NDTA has focused on outreach and learning about transmission obstacles in North 

Dakota. The NDTA also has been working to develop transmission plans with project 

participants in Lignite Vision 21, an organization formed to consider and develop lignite 

power plants in North Dakota. The NDTA also has participated in the Upper Great Plains 

Transmission Coalition, a consortium of wind and coal interests, and has filed comments at 

FERC regarding the Midwest ISO's transmission cost recovery mechanisms. The NDTA is 

also working to incorporate North Dakota into the Minnesota utilities’ CapX 2020 

transmission planning process. The NDTA said it is interested in acting more as a 

facilitator for encouraging private industry investment in transmission. 

 E-2
On April 12, 2007, the North Dakota Industrial Commission announced that the Bank of 

North Dakota would be providing $25 million of the $33 million needed towards a new 

transmission line being built by Basin Electric Power Cooperative. The project consists of 

a new 67-mile long 230 kV line from an existing substation near Belfield to a proposed 

new substation near Rhame, in southwest North Dakota. NDTA facilitated the Bank of 

North Dakota's decision to participate in this project by brokering the deal with Basin 

Electric. Basin has plans for a second transmission line that it may also ask for assistance 

from NDTA and the Bank of North Dakota. The line would run from the Antelope Valley 

generating plant near Beulah to Tioga. 

 E-3
SOUTH DAKOTA 

I. Legislation 

Name: South Dakota Energy Infrastructure Authority 

Legislation: South Dakota Codified Laws Chapter 1-161 (2005) 

 http://www.sdeia.com/PDF/SDEIALegislativelanguage.pdf

Date Enacted: 2005 Legislative Session 

Governed by: Independent Public Corporation 

Administered: Five-member board 

Reports to: Department of Tourism and State Development 

Financing Cap: $1 billion 

Phone: 605-773-3301 

Fax: 605-773-3256 

Web site: http://www.sdeia.com

Contact: Hunter Roberts, hunter.roberts@state.sd.us

Summary 

The South Dakota Energy Infrastructure Authority (SDEIA) was created to facilitate the 

development of energy production facilities and energy transmission facilities both inside 

South Dakota and outside the state. SDEIA is a separate stand-alone entity that may 

(among others things): 

• Make and execute contracts, borrow money, and issue bonds 

• Employ engineers, attorneys, and other consultants and employees 

• Contract with agencies of the state to provide staff and support services 

• Make loans and grants, and enter into financing agreements with any governmental 

agency or any person for the costs incurred in connection with the development, 

construction, acquisition, improvement, maintenance, and operation of 

decommissioning of electric transmission facilities. 

SDEIA may finance, construct, develop, maintain, operate, and decommission new or 

upgraded transmission facilities. That said, SDEIA is not designed to own and/or operate 

transmission facilities, but to facilitate the development of transmission infrastructure by 

other parties. SDEIA can establish fees, rates, tariffs, or other charges for the use of its 

facilities and for all services it renders, but must consult with the Public Utilities 

Commission and any other relevant governmental authority prior to doing so. SDEIA also 

has the authority to investigate, plan, prioritize, and establish transmission corridors and 

may enter into partnerships with public or private entities to develop and operate 

transmission facilities. SDEIA may lease, rent, or own transmission facilities, although it 

must divest ownership of any transmission facility as soon as economically practicable, 

defined as recovery of SDEIA’s net investment. 

SDEIA is also required by statute to help entities that wish to develop new, or upgrade 

existing, transmission lines through designing a business plan and identifying potential 

financing options. SDEIA must also help other state transmission infrastructure authorities 

 F-1
and federal or regional entities that wish to develop new, or upgrade existing, transmission 

lines to transmit generation to, from, or within South Dakota. 

II. Organization Size and Structure 

SDEIA named Hunter Roberts as Executive Director in April 2007. SDEIA is governed 

by a five-member board appointed by the Governor and serving staggered six-year terms. 

The board members as of August 2007 are: 

• Mike Trykoski, Rushmore Professional Services 

• Kyle White, Black Hills Corp. 

• Audry Ricketts, South Dakota Rural Electric Association 

• Mike Held, South Dakota Farm Bureau 

• Dr. Mike Ropp, South Dakota State University 

III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

The legislative language suggests that SDEIA could support any “energy production 

facilities” and “energy transmission facilities”. The Authority has, at this time, chosen to 

limit the scope of their activities to electricity. South Dakota is working to develop its 

electricity generation resources; therefore a significant portion of SDEIA’s activity is 

focused on bringing this generation to market. 

IV. Funding and Financing 

Initially, funds were transferred from the Department of Tourism and State Development, 

and staff were on loan. The legislature subsequently approved a total of $247,000 in 

funding for 2006 and 2007, and $56,000 for 2008. The legislation gives SDEIA the ability 

to issue revenue bonds to finance the development or ownership of facilities, up to a 

maximum of $1 billion, but the bonds must first be approved by the Legislature. SDEIA 

can enter into partnerships and own or partially own energy facilities but is required to 

divest itself of ownership at the first economically sound opportunity. The authority can 

invest funds not needed immediately in (among other things) bonds, notes, treasury bills, 

certificates of deposit, and obligations issued by any state. 

V. Activities to Date 

Originally, the SDEIA was required to meet annually with any interested transmission 

owner or generator to determine the need for generation or transmission in South Dakota 

and to evaluate how SDEIA may help with these endeavors. The SDEIA then had to 

submit a report by December 1st each year to the Governor, the Legislature, and the South 

Dakota congressional delegation outlining how to stimulate generation in South Dakota 

and transmission to, from, and within the state, based on the interviews. The SDEIA also 

had to annually review state and federal laws and rules affecting generation and 

transmission and make recommendations for improvements to the Governor, Legislature 

and the congressional delegation. In early 2008, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 54, 

amending SDEIA’s annual interview report requirement. SDEIA is now required to submit 

 F-2
interview reports at least every five years, though the authority can choose to do so more 

frequently. This change was made at SDEIA’s request and the Authority feels that the 

legislative change will give them more flexibility in their future efforts. 

SDEIA has conducted several studies since its inception, and a summary of these studies is 

provided below. 

Joint Report of the South Dakota Energy Infrastructure Authority and South Dakota 

Energy Task Force (December 2005) 

Citing similar reporting requirements (the Task Force was given the goal of examining 

energy resources and transmission issues) the SDEIA and the South Dakota Energy Task 

Force combined their resources and issued a joint report. The report examined in depth the 

transmission system in South Dakota, specifically the issues of transmission reliability, 

transmission constraints, federal requirements, and the operations of the Midwest 

Independent System Operator. The report identified potential markets for power generated 

in South Dakota, noting the state had facilities in both the Eastern and Western 

Interconnections. The report identified a need for both baseload and renewable power that 

could be developed and exported to load centers in both directions, and identified the 

transmission infrastructure upgrades required to transport that power to market. 

Project Report: Results of Industry Interviews (November 2006) 

This report summarized a series of interviews conducted by Schulte Associates LLC on 

behalf of SDEIA. The original legislation (Chapter 1-161) required SDEIA to conduct 

interviews with entities that produce, transmit, distribute, regulate, control and market 

electricity in South Dakota. Schulte Associates was contracted to conduct these interviews 

and gain input on potential projects for increasing electric power generation in South 

Dakota; enhancements needed to transmit electricity; and activities the state and SDEIA 

could undertake to assist in developing the above. The interviewees noted that South 

Dakota has significant wind resources that could be marketed to other states, but the 

needed transmission was lacking. In particular, the report highlights the ‘seams’ issue, 

where parts of South Dakota are in the Midwest ISO but large portions are not, and while 

transmission development has been occurring within the Midwest ISO areas, these are not 

connecting to areas outside the Midwest ISO footprint. 

Project Report: Energy Study (January 2007) 

Also conducted by Schulte Associates LLC on behalf of SDEIA, the study examines 

options for developing coal-, nuclear-, and wind-energy generating facilities in South 

Dakota specifically for the purpose of exporting power to other states. The report describes 

two coal-based technologies and notes there are no coal mines in South Dakota and no 

major rail line routes to bring coal into the state, making construction of baseload coalfired units costlier than in other regions. The report examines four potential nuclear 

technology options and advises that a nuclear power plant in South Dakota would be a 

‘greenfield’ site entailing significant extra costs associated with siting and permitting, and 

additionally, nuclear plants require large bulk power transfer capacity, something currently 

 F-3
lacking in the state. The study concludes that wind energy offers the greatest potential for 

development in South Dakota, estimating 12,000 MW of wind energy could be developed 

and exported as long as adequate transmission was made available. 

South Dakota Wind Power Report (December 2007)

This report was created by SDEIA to identify the issues surrounding wind power 

development in South Dakota and to address concerns that South Dakota is not doing 

enough to develop wind energy. The report is the result of information gathered from 

interviews that SDEIA conducted with developers, electric power entities, and government 

agencies during the summer of 2007. It is intended to serve as a resource document for 

government officials and the public to provide guidance on decision-making and does not 

make any specific recommendations respecting wind development. The report notes that 

the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) estimates of South Dakota wind 

capacity could provide for over 50 % of U.S. electricity demand. But SDEIA points out 

that a lack of transmission capacity and the large distances and difficulties involved in 

connecting this amount of wind to the grid makes reaching such a goal unfeasible. Nearterm wind development will focus on transmission into Minnesota and points east. South 

Dakota would like to be able to move wind energy west into the Colorado system but there 

is a very limited amount of transmission connection with the Western grid. The report also 

contains extensive discussions on the technical aspects of wind development, the costs and 

benefits to developers and to the state, and tax and regulatory considerations. 

 F-4
WYOMING 

I. Legislation 

Name: Wyoming Infrastructure Authority 

Legislation: Senate File No. SF0052, 04LSO-0089 

 http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2004/engross/SF0052.pdf

Amendment: HB NO. 0129 

 http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2006/Introduced/HB0129.pdf

Date Enacted: June 2004 

Date Amended: June 2006 

Governed by: Independent State Instrumentality 

Administered: Five-member Board of Directors 

Reports to: Wyoming Legislature and Governor 

Financing Cap: $1 billion for private activity, no cap for WIA-owned investments 

Phone: 307-635-3573 

Fax: 307-635-5336 

Website: http://www.wyia.org/ 

Email: info@wyia.org 

Contact: Steve Waddington, Executive Director, stevew@wyia.org

Summary 

The Wyoming Infrastructure Authority (WIA) was established by legislation in 2004 and 

was the first state transmission infrastructure authority. The statute creating the WIA 

states that the purpose of creating the Wyoming Infrastructure Authority is to “diversify 

and expand the Wyoming economy through improvements in the state’s electric 

transmission infrastructure and to facilitate the consumption of Wyoming energy by 

planning, financing, constructing, developing, acquiring, maintaining, and operating 

electric transmission facilities and related supporting infrastructure and undivided or other 

interest therein to facilitate the transmission of energy.” WIA is a state instrumentality 

governed by a five-member board appointed by the Governor serving staggered four-year 

terms. 

WIA can employ staff; make contracts; receive gifts or grants; plan, finance, construct, 

maintain and operate within and outside the state, property, structures, equipment, facilities 

and works of public improvement; and enter into partnerships with public and private 

entities. WIA may also plan and establish electric transmission corridors and acquire by 

condemnation any properties necessary for the development of transmission infrastructure. 

WIA can borrow money and issue revenue bonds to finance projects. 

In 2006, a legislative amendment expanded WIA’s scope to include advanced coal 

technology and energy technology facilities. WIA’s authority now includes the facilities 

and related supporting infrastructure for advanced technologies utilizing coal for 

production and transmission of electricity. Therefore, unlike some of the other 

transmission infrastructure authorities profiled, WIA can finance, construct, or develop 

certain electric production facilities as well as transmission facilities. 

 G-1
WIA sees itself as having two primary roles: 1.) a promoter and facilitator of transmission 

projects, and 2.) a participant in the planning, development, and financing of transmission 

projects. WIA plans on being the lead party in the early planning and development of 

transmission projects, but has an exit plan should a transmission project prove 

commercially viable without WIA’s involvement. WIA looks to enter into public-private 

partnerships to promote specific project initiatives, and then to exit a project once the 

project has been financed and WIA recovers its fees (with interest). 

WIA defines four stages for each transmission project, with WIA being involved in at least 

the first two stages. The first stage is a feasibility assessment and includes selecting 

project partners, identifying and meeting with prospective generators and other customers 

of the project, addressing public policy issues relating to the project, building public 

support for the project, addressing administrative and regulatory issues pertaining to the 

project, and determining the business structures, legal documentation, and budgets required 

to complete the project. 

The second stage focuses on development and encompasses identifying and obtaining 

project permits, performing engineering, studying options for project cash flows, including 

project revenues and cost recovery, initial development of the financial model for the 

project, initial arrangement of the financing for the project, and finalizing and creating the 

business structures required to complete the project. 

The third stage is aimed at financing and final project development and entails finalizing 

agreements to provide transmission services, finalizing the financing of the project and the 

project schedule, acquiring rights-of-way necessary for the project, selecting the contractor 

for the project, and issuing requests for proposals for other project contractors. Assuming 

the financing is finalized, WIA envisions exiting the project at this stage. The fourth stage 

is focused on project construction until commercial operation. 

II. Organization Size and Structure 

WIA is governed by a five-member board appointed by the Governor serving staggered 

four-year terms. The statute creating the WIA also called for the creation of a five-member 

advisory board. WIA is authorized to hire staff as needed and currently has three staff 

members. The staff and board as of February 2008 are listed below. 

WIA Staff: 

• Steve Waddington, Executive Director 

• Holly Martinez, Administrative Manager 

• Loyd Drain, Development Director

Board: 

• Mike Easley, (Chairman), Powder River Energy Corp. 

• Kyle White (Vice-Chair), Black Hills Power Corp. 

• Bryce Freeman, (Treasurer & Secretary), Wyoming Office of Consumer Advocate 

• Donald O’Shei, TriLateral Energy LLC 

• TBD 

 G-2
III. Eligible Technologies and Applications 

The Act originally limited WIA to electric transmission infrastructure, but the 2006 

amendment expanded WIA’s scope to projects dealing with energy rather than just 

electrical energy. Theoretically, WIA could become involved with all types of energy 

infrastructure development. However, the intent was to expand the WIA role to include the 

promotion of advanced technologies to utilize coal for electricity production. Wyoming 

has abundant coal reserves and excellent untapped wind power resources. A driving factor 

in the creation of WIA was to facilitate the development of coal and wind resources and 

provide access to markets for new Wyoming generation, particularly into California and 

the Southwest. 

IV. Funding and Financing 

WIA has been generally supported and well funded by the Wyoming Legislature. All 

funding from the legislature is from the general fund in the form of loans. In the initial 

legislation, WIA was authorized an appropriated loan of $250,000 for start-up operations. 

For the fiscal year starting July 2005, a budget of $6.6 million was approved with $1.6 

million earmarked for operations and $5 million established in a development fund for 

transmission development, feasibility studies, permitting and siting costs, and engaging 

potential private industry partners. For 2007/2008, WIA has a $1.6 million operating 

budget and an increase in the development account to $10 million. Funds from the 

development account are released subject to a proposed project, an economic benefit 

report, and the approval of the Wyoming State Loans and Investments Board (SLIB)x

. So 

far, $2 million has been released from the loan fund and is being deployed in development 

activities. 

WIA has the authority to create and issue revenue bonds through resolutions of the Board. 

These bonds are obligations of WIA and do not constitute obligations of the state. WIA 

can collect revenues from the operation of any facilities it owns and the bonds are payable 

only from this revenue. WIA can extend its bonding capability to the private sector for 

infrastructure investments, subject to a maximum outstanding amount of bonds of $1 

billion.y

 WIA can also borrow funds and accept grants, and it can mortgage and lease or 

sublease any of its facilities. 

Prior to going forward with a project, WIA is obligated to provide public notice and give 

other entities 30 days to indicate intent to take over the project. The proponent then has 

180 days to start the project. If neither of these conditions is met, WIA may proceed with 

the project itself. 

 

x

 The five state-wide Wyoming elected officials comprise the SLIB. 

y

 This cap is not applicable to bonds issued for facilities owned by WIA; however, it is unlikely that WIA 

will own facilities to any measurable degree. 

 G-3
V. Activities to Date 

WIA has been very active since its creation in 2004. The following is a list of projects 

currently in progress. 

• Hughes Transmission Project. In September 2005, WIA did a private placement of 

bonds to the Wyoming State Treasurer, amounting to $34.5 million. The proceeds 

financed three-quarters of the costs of a transmission line being constructed by 

Basin Electric Power Cooperative of Bismarck, North Dakota. WIA will receive 

a transaction fee of 0.125% amounting to $43,125 per year and decreasing over 

time as the principal loan amount is paid off. All told, WIA expects to receive 

about $600,000 over the 20-year term of the contract. The project is a 130-mile, 

230 kV transmission line connecting the Hughes substation, north of Rozet, to the 

Carr Draw substation, west of Gillette and a proposed substation north of 

Sheridan. 

• TransWest Express. WIA has partnered with the Arizona Public Service (APS) 

and National Grid to develop a transmission line from the Powder River Basin to 

Phoenix, to enable 3,000 MW of new Wyoming coal and wind generation to reach 

the Desert Southwest. The participants are currently in the midst of a four-year 

plan to invest about $100 million to design and engineer the line and secure all 

necessary permits and routing rights-of-way. WIA has a 10% stake in the project 

and will be reimbursed with interest should the project receive financing. 

The TransWest Express line has some overlap with the Gateway South line 

proposed by PacifiCorp that would extend from Wyoming into Utah and into the 

Desert Southwest. In August 2007, WIA entered into an interim agreement with 

APS, National Grid, and PacifiCorp to co-develop the Gateway South and 

TransWest Express lines, with a decision on next steps to be made in 2008. 

National Grid will be the lead developer for co-development of both lines, with 

active participation from WIA, APS, and PacifiCorp. 

• Wyoming Colorado Intertie Transmission Project. WIA has partnered with TransElect and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), aiming to expand 

transmission capacity across the constrained path referred to as TOT3 between 

Wyoming and Colorado. Siemens/PTI completed an initial planning study for the 

project. The study considers a number of different configurations for the project 

and indicates that 800 to 900 MW can be transferred from Wyoming to Colorado 

by building a 345 kV line. The line is slated to interconnect to the Pawnee 

substation in Public Service of Colorado’s service territory, which corresponds to 

one of the proposed energy zones under Colorado’s recently enacted renewable 

energy zone legislation. 

An open season to allocate transmission capacity will be held in summer 2008 

and, depending on the market response, the proposed transmission line could be 

double-circuited to allow more generation to be put on the line. The line could be 

developed in two phases, with the first phase accessing wind generation in 

 G-4
Wyoming and terminating near the Laramie River Station, near Wheatland, and a 

second phase including base load and/or load-leveling facilities and additional 

wind generation. If the open season is successful, operation of the line could 

begin by mid-2013. 

• High Plains Express. WIA is participating with several other parties in developing 

a high voltage system from northeast Wyoming heading south through eastern 

Colorado to New Mexico and Arizona. Additional companies participating 

include Trans-Elect, WAPA, Salt River Project, PNM, Xcel Energy, Colorado 

Springs Utilities, Platte River Power Authority, Tri-State Generation and 

Transmission Association, and the Colorado Clean Energy Development 

Authority. The New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority is 

contemplating joining the project. Phase I consisted of preliminary engineering 

and economic studies, and was completed in early 2008. Phase I showed positive 

benefits arising from the project. As a result, the project has moved on to Phase II, 

the development stage, consisting of defining the project, ownership negotiations, 

studies on siting and economics, review of commercial issues, and addressing 

regulatory and policy issues. The project consists of two 500 kV lines with 3,500 

MW of capacity connecting four other transmission projects already under 

development into an integrated grid. These other projects are the WyomingColorado Intertie, Eastern Plains Transmission Project, SunZia, and a New 

Mexico wind collector project. The project is expected to cost $5.13 billion. 

• Wyoming-West Project. WIA, in partnership with National Grid and WAPA, 

conducted a feasibility study on transmitting nearly 7,000 MW of Wyoming 

generation south to Nevada and California. The feasibility study examined 

corridor availability for a 345 kV and a 500 kV line option from southwest 

Wyoming through Utah or Nevada and possibly extending to California. A rightof-way application was filed with the U. S. Bureau of Land Management. The 

feasibility study, completed in 2007, resulted in the project being placed on hold 

in favor of devoting resources to the TransWest Express and Gateway South 

projects, which perform a similar function. 

• Clean Coal Gasification Plant. WIA partnered with PacifiCorp to conduct 

feasibility studies on three different clean coal power plant technology options for 

a potential integrated gasification combined-cycle plant near Point of Rocks, 

Wyoming. In January 2008, PacifiCorp announced they had completed the 

feasibility studies and found the technology to be too expensive to implement at 

this time. As a result, the project has been put on hold. 

 G-5
F1146-E(09/2007) 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate (0704-0188). Respondents 

should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

May 2008 

2. REPORT TYPE

Subcontract report 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

December 2007 – December 2008 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

DE-AC36-99-GO10337 

5b. GRANT NUMBER

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

State Transmission Infrastructure Authorities: The Story So Far 

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

NREL/SR-500-43146 

5e. TASK NUMBER

WER85001 

6. AUTHOR(S)

K. Porter and S. Fink 

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Exeter Associates, Inc. 

5565 Sterrett Place, Suite 310 

Columbia, MD 21044 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NUMBER

LAM-8-77548-01 

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

NREL 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

1617 Cole Blvd. 

Golden, CO 80401-3393 11. SPONSORING/MONITORING 

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

NREL/SR-500-43146 

12. DISTRIBUTION AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

National Technical Information Service 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

5285 Port Royal Road 

Springfield, VA 22161 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

NREL Technical Monitor: David Corbus 

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 Words)

This report examines the status and future direction of state transmission infrastructure authorities. It summarizes 

common characteristics, discusses current transmission projects, and outlines common issues the state infrastructure 

authorities have faced. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS

transmission; state transmission infrastructure authorities; Western Governors' Association; wind power 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON 

a. REPORT 

Unclassified 

b. ABSTRACT 

Unclassified

c. THIS PAGE 

Unclassified

17. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT

UL 

18. NUMBER 

OF PAGES 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18