[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11517-11518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4464]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[OE Docket No. RRTT-IR-001]


Rapid Response Team for Transmission

AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, 
Department of Energy, DoE.

ACTION: Request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy's Office of Electricity Delivery and 
Energy Reliability is seeking information on the questions related to 
permitting of transmission lines. In responding to this RFI, please 
specify the role of your company or agency in the electric sector.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 28, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to: Lamont Jackson, Office of 
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20585. Because of delays in handling conventional mail, it is 
recommended that documents be transmitted by overnight mail, by 
electronic mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ace0cdc1c3c2d882e6cdcfc7dfc3c2ecc4dd82c8c3c982cbc3da"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a2eec3cfcdccd68ce8c3c1c9d1cdcce2cad38cc6cdc78cc5cdd4">[email protected]</span></a>, or by facsimile to 202-
586-8008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lamont Jackson (Program Office) at 
202-586-0808, or by email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c78ba6aaa8a9b3e98da6a4acb4a8a987afb6e9a3a8a2e9a0a8b1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f5b994989a9b81dbbf94969e869a9bb59d84db919a90db929a83">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Infrastructure projects--such as high 
voltage, long distance, electric transmission facilities--often involve 
multiple Federal, State, local and Tribal authorizations and are 
subject to a wide array of processes and procedural requirements in 
order to obtain all necessary permits and other authorizations. Delays 
in securing required statutory reviews, permits, and consultations can 
threaten the completion projects of national and regional significance.
    As our nation moves towards cleaner, more diverse fuel sources and 
responds to state renewable energy standards, a number of developers 
are looking to build electric generators where the fuel is most 
abundant, which is often far from electric customers, thereby requiring 
long transmission lines. At least three problems may arise when trying 
to develop this type of infrastructure: (1) Non-synchronous evaluations 
by all governmental entities with jurisdiction; (2) uncertainty about 
whether all necessary permits and approvals will be received; and (3) 
significantly different development times for generation and 
transmission. This Request for Information is focused on making the 
development times for generation and transmission to be more 
commensurate with one another.
    While most types of electric generators can be developed within a 
few years, developing the transmission necessary for that generation 
may take much longer. The differential in development times between 
generation and transmission creates a Catch-22 that inhibits the 
development of both. (Of course if a load serving entity is developing 
both the generation and transmission for its own customers, then no 
such Catch-22 exists.) While generation developers need assurance that 
transmission will be built before they will commit to building the 
generation, the transmission developers need a commitment that the 
generation will be built. As the differential in development times 
increases, the Catch-22 deepens, thereby hampering the building the 
infrastructure this Nation needs.

Presidential Memorandum--Speeding Infrastructure Development Through 
More Efficient and Effective Permitting and Environmental Review

    On August 31, 2011, the President issued a memorandum to the heads 
of Executive Departments and Agencies. That Memorandum states:

in the current economic climate it is critical that agencies take 
steps to expedite permitting and review, through such strategies as 
integrating planning and environmental reviews; coordinating multi-
agency or multi-governmental reviews and approvals to run 
concurrently; setting clear schedules for completing steps in the 
environmental review and permitting process; and utilizing 
information technologies to inform the public about the progress of 
environmental reviews as well as the progress of Federal permitting 
and review processes.

    It further states that agencies should ``ensure that their 
processes for reviewing infrastructure proposals work efficiently to 
protect our environment, provide for public participation and certainty 
of process, ensure safety, and support vital economic growth.''

Rapid Response Team for Transmission

    Recognizing the need for Federal agencies to coordinate their 
efforts on transmission and to quickly respond to challenges, nine 
Federal agencies have been closely coordinating their review of 
electric transmission on Federal lands under a joint Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) executed in 2009.
    Building on the cooperation developed through the MOU, and in 
response to the Presidential Memorandum, on October 5, 2011, the 
Administration announced the creation of a Rapid Response Team for 
Transmission (RRTT).
    The RRTT aims to improve the overall quality and timeliness of 
electric transmission infrastructure permitting, review, and 
consultation by the Federal government on both Federal and non-Federal 
lands through:
    <bullet> Coordinating statutory permitting, review, and 
consultation schedules and processes among involved Federal and state 
agencies, as appropriate, through Integrated Federal Planning;
    <bullet> Applying a uniform and consistent approach to 
consultations with Tribal governments; and,
    <bullet> Resolving interagency conflicts and ensuring that all 
involved agencies are fully engaged and meeting timelines.
    Participating Agencies include: the Department of Agriculture, the 
Department of Commerce, the Department of Defense, the Department of 
Energy, the Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection 
Agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Advisory Council 
on Historic Preservation, and the White House Council on Environmental 
Quality.

Request for Information (RFI)

    Building upon the Presidential Memorandum and in support of the 
RRTT, the Department of Energy's Office of Electricity is seeking 
information on the questions asked below. In responding to this RFI, 
please specify the role of your company or agency in the electric 
sector.
    (1). The development timelines for generation and attendant 
transmission are often not coordinated or run concurrently. Because of 
the lengthy time to obtain regulatory reviews, permits and approvals 
(collectively ``Regulatory Permits''), major new transmission lines can 
take significantly longer to develop than some types of generation to 
which the transmission would connect. This Request for Information will 
refer to the difference in development times between generation and 
transmission as

[[Page 11518]]

``Incongruent Development Times.'' Please answer the following \1\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Since the Catch-22 is avoided when a load-serving entity is 
developing the generation and transmission for its own customers, 
for purposes of answering the questions, please assume that non-
LSE's are developing the generation and its attendant transmission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. Describe the challenges created both by the timeline for 
obtaining Regulatory Permits for transmission and by the Incongruent 
Development Times.
    b. To what extent do the Incongruent Development Times hamper 
transmission and/or generation infrastructure development?
    c. What are the primary risks associated with developing 
transmission vis-[agrave]-vis the timeline for obtaining Regulatory 
Permits as well as the Incongruent Development Times?
    d. How is the financing for developing the attendant transmission 
influenced by its lengthy development time and by the Dissonant 
Development Times?
    e. How if at all, do development timelines and the Incongruent 
Development Times affect the decisions made in utilities' integrated 
resource planning, if applicable?
    f. How do development timelines and the Incongruent Development 
Times affect the ability of parties to enter into open seasons or 
power-purchase agreements?
    (2) Besides improving the efficiency of permitting and approving 
transmission, are there any other steps the federal government \2\ 
could take to eliminate the barriers created by the Dissonant 
Development Times?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ While Incongruent Development Times are caused by a number 
of forces including state, local and Tribal decisions, the parties 
to the MOU are only Federal agencies and, therefore, this RFI 
focuses on how the federal agencies can improve their own processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) What strategies can the Federal government take to decrease the 
time that Federal agencies require for evaluating Regulatory Permits 
for transmission? What other steps can the Federal government take to 
address the challenges created by Incongruent Development Times?
    (4) One way to make the Regulatory Permit process and development 
times between remote generation and attendant transmission more 
commensurate, is to decrease the time for permitting transmission by 
some amount. In determining how much time can be saved, developing a 
benchmark may be helpful. What benchmark should be used?
    a. Example--power purchase agreements as the benchmark: how far in 
the future do load serving entities (LSE's) seek to purchase energy or 
capacity from remote resources? Do LSE's seek PPAs that begin 
delivering energy/capacity 3 years from the signing of the PPA? 7 
years? 10 years? Please explain why PPA's are signed at this time.
    b. Example--development times as the benchmark: How long does it 
take to design, permit and build different types of remote generation?
    (5) In your experience, how long does it take to design, permit and 
build transmission?
    (6) Assume that Federal, state, Tribal and local governments sought 
to set a goal for the length of time used for completing the Regulatory 
Permitting process for transmission projects so that the development 
times between generation and transmission were more commensurate, what 
goal should that be? As the length of the project and the number of 
governments with jurisdictions increase so will the time necessary for 
permitting and approvals; accordingly, consider providing a goal that 
could be scalable according to the length of the line.
    Interested parties to this RFI might include, but are not limited 
to: federal and state agencies, Native American Tribes, transmission 
developers, renewable energy developers, investors, manufacturers, 
electric utilities, independent power producers, non-governmental 
organizations, academics, and other public, private, or non-profit 
entities.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 21, 2012.
Brian Mills,
Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of Electricity Delivery and 
Energy Reliability.
[FR Doc. 2012-4464 Filed 2-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>