CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
June 12, 1967
Page 15322
THE ELECTRIC POWER RELIABILITY ACT OF 1967
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the senior Senator from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON] is absent on official business today, and, at his request, I read the following statement accompanying the introduction of a bill, on his behalf
STATEMENT BY SENATOR MAGNUSON READ BY SENATOR MUSKIE
Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, I introduce, by request, for appropriate referral, the Electric Power Reliability Act. I ask unanimous consent that at the close of these remarks, the letter of transmittal, the paper entitled "The Electric Power Reliability Act of 1967-A Short Explanation," the section-by-section analysis and the bill be printed in the RECORD.
On November 9, 1965, the lights in the Northeast flickered and failed. In 12 minutes, without prior physical destruction of any equipment, millions were without electricity. Since then other cascading failures of a lesser magnitude have occurred.
Last week, the PJM system in the midAtlantic region failed. Fortunately, the outage did not spread to Washington, D.C., which is connected to the system. On the same day, war was erupting in the Mideast, and this Capitol, like many others in the world, needed the availability of every service possible, most of which are dependent on electricity. As this mid-Atlantic failure proved, a 99.99plus pattern of reliability in the electric utility field, commendable as it is, does not rule out the compounding of circumstances that could lead to disaster.
That the lights are on again does not mean that the matter is closed. There are already predictions that in the event of a long, hot summer, there could be a serious power shortage in the mid-Atlantic States. If another cascading failure should result, it might affect Washington, New York, and all areas between, and all systems interconnected with this locale.
These blackouts have been the subject of concern at all levels of government and industry. Immediately after the 1965 massive failure, the President requested the Federal Power Commission to make an immediate investigation. An interim report was issued, and the final report will be available soon. The President's message on consumer protection showed the administration's continuing concern and indicated that legislation would be recommended. This is the legislation that I am introducing today.
I join in the statement of the President in urging that the proposal be considered promptly by the Congress. The Committee on Commerce will soon announce early dates for beginning hearings on this bill.
The appended materials adequately cover the broad scope of the legislation; but I wish to call attention to one particular item, section 410, "Review as to land use." Inclusion of this indicates the awareness of the President of not only the need to use the best technology for reliable service, but also the importance of making that technology environmentally acceptable. This is a commendable recognition of the many facets of the problem.
This morning's Washington Post contained a very favorable editorial on the proposed legislation. I ask unanimous
consent that it be printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
KEEPING THE LIGHTS ON
The Federal Power Commission lost little time in drafting an imaginative and farreaching legislative proposal for reducing the recurrence of paralyzing electrical blackouts. Congress should respond by holding hearings as soon as it is feasible.
The "Electric Power Reliability Act," submitted by Chairman Lee C. White and his colleagues, would make the FTC responsible for coordinating and strengthening the Interrelated grids of utility systems. The FPC would be empowered to review and approve the construction, of the extra high voltage lines that link individual utilities. It would be empowered to require interconnections between utilities when they are in the public interest. And the FPC would be authorized, after consultation with regional councils of utilities, to "set forth reasonable criteria" for "reliable planning and operation," criteria that would include the provision of "reserve capacity for reliability."
There is some question as whether the provisions (sections 401 (b) and 408) for ensuring adequate reserve generating capacity are sufficiently strong. But with the exception of that possible weakness, the FPC proposal is commendable. It would also establish a National Electric Studies Commission, designed to stimulate scientific interest in the provision of reliable service.
With a few distinguished exceptions, the electric power industry is not noted for its willingness to innovate. The FPC, which is principally concerned with rate regulation, is not now in a position to provide the leadership and technical guidance that are required to enhance the reliability of interconnected electric utilities. But a country that is capable of devising intricate systems for the exploration of space can surely solve the problems of keeping its lights on. The place to begin is in the Congress which ought to adopt and if possible strengthen the FPC's admirable proposal.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be received and appropriately referred; and, without objection, the bill, letter of transmittal, paper, and section-by-section analysis will be printed in the RECORD.
The bill (S. 1934) to amend the Federal Power Act to facilitate the provision of reliable, abundant and economical electric power supply, by strengthening existing mechanisms for coordination of electric utility systems and encouraging the installation and use of the products of advancing technology with due regard for the proper conservation of scenic and other natural resources, introduced by Mr. MUSKIE (for himself, Mr. MAGNUSON, and other Senators), by request, was received, read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Commerce, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
R
The letter of transmittal, paper, and section-by-section analysis are as follows:
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Washington, June 8, 1967. Hon. HUBERT HUMPHREY,
President of the Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: The Federal Power Commission transmits herewith for consideration by the appropriate committee twenty copies of a draft bill, the proposed Electric
Power Reliability Act. which would add a new Part IV to the Federal Power Act. The bill is designed to assist the electric utility industry to meet both the challenges and opportunities of a dynamic technology which confront America's pluralistic power industry.
The President's message to Congress on consumer protection of February 16, 1967, referred to recent power failures. as well as to the possibility of improvement in electric service. As the President stated, "● ' ' power systems must be carefully planned, coordinated, and strengthened to protect the customer against cascading power failures."
The electric industry today has achieved impressive technological progress. Its generators are of immense capacity and its extra-high voltage transmission lines can move large blocks of power over great distances. These improvements have not only made power supply more reliable, but reduced its cost as well. Yet more must be done.
Study of the power industry's occasional failures leads us to propose the Electric Power Reliability Act. We believe it will provide a sound basis for improving our Nation's electric service. Experience has shown that carefully coordinated planning and operation can secure maximum reliability and efficiency without excessive cost. The Electric Power Reliability Act would (1) call for the establishment of regional planning organizations to ensure that plans for bulk power facilities are adequate, (2) authorize the Federal Power Commission to establish planning and operating standards to enhance reliability, (3) provide for Commission review and approval of extra-high voltage transmission lines and abandonment of bulk power services, and (4) authorize the Commission to require interconnections between bulk power generating utilities.
The electric utility industry, acting voluntarily, has made substantial progress toward the goals of adequate interconnection and coordination. As the President noted in his message on consumer protection:
"Much of this effort is already being voluntarily undertaken by America's great electric power industry. For example, in recognition of the importance of coordination 23 utilities in an eight-state area recently announced the formation of a regional council."
The Electric Power Reliability Act would assist in beneficial undertakings such as this, and would secure similar benefits in areas where progress has been less rapid.
The key to improved coordination under the proposed bill would be the regional councils. The expanding technology of the electric power industry, entailing as it does the use of giant generators and extra-high-voltage transmission lines, has made it imperative that coordination in planning and operation cover a wider area than the service territory of any one utility or small power pool. Effective coordination requires a high degree of cooperation among systems, on a regional scale. The establishment of regional electric power councils throughout the Nation is essential to enable institutions of the power industry, consisting of 3,600 separate utilities. to keep pace with and implement the developing power-system technology. It is equally clear that all segments of the industry-the investor-owned utility companies, the municipal systems, the rural electric cooperatives, and the Federal and State power agencies-must join together in forward-looking cooperation to plan and build safe and reliable systems. Each system must consider as part of its public service responsibility, the needs and desires, the strengths and weaknesses. of its neighbors throughout a broad region. The Electric Power Reliability Act would promote, encourage, and facilitate joint planning for the common good.
The Electric Power Reliability Act would
strengthen coordination of the systems making up our pluralistic electric utility industry by adding a new Part IV to the Federal Power Act. The new Part IV would rely heavily on more active coordination of planning by utilities, through the mechanism of regional councils. The Federal Power Commission would be instructed to promote meaningful coordination on a regional scale and to provide a public presence in the work of the regional councils. The bill further provides inducements, including Federal eminent domain, rights-of-way across federally owned lands, and immunity from certain antitrust actions.
The Commission would be authorized to develop, in consultation with experts drawn from the entire industry, planning and operating standards to enhance power reliability. These standards could, for example, embrace criteria for programs of automatic loadshedding in emergencies, and for evaluating the adequacy of existing and proposed transmission systems. They could be nationwide in their application, or could be tailored to the individual requirements of a particular region.
Transmission systems constructed for enhanced reliability must have a proper regard for the public interest in wise land use, including the preservation of scenic and historic areas. The proposed bill includes a procedure for consultation of responsible local, State and Federal agencies concerned with land use, and requires the Commission to defer to their views when it can do so consistently with the objectives of the Electric Power reliability Act.
The subject matter of the proposed Act is complex, and the responsibilities it would assign are weighty. Much groundwork would have to be laid following its enactment, and the benefits stemming from the planning it would promote would not all be immediate or spectacular. However, as befits a statute that promises long-term benefits, it has been planned and drafted over a long period. The present bill reflects the Commission's intensive studies in the National Power Survey and its investigations of the Northeast Power Failure of November, 1965. That investigation began with the preparation of the initial report on the Northeast failure, issued in December 1965, and has been usefully supplemented from time to time with studies of power failures in other parts of the Nation. The Commission has drawn upon the ideas of many experts in formulating its own views reflected in this bill. We have had the benefit of Congressional studies of these matters.
The Commission's final report on the Northeast Power Failure and related studies is in the final stages of preparation and printing and should be available for release shortly. We believe that the report will be of assistance to Congress in considering the proposed Act, as well as indicating guidelines for putting it into effect.
We believe this legislation would be in the public interest. We regard it as a sound and workable plan for assuring to all Americans not only freedom from the danger and inconvenience of power failures and shortages. but all the fullest advantage that can be gained from the widespread employment of the technology which our power industry has developed. Enactment of this measure will strengthen the Nation's ability to meet the challenge of providing the American power consumer with the most reliable and most efficient service possible.
In his statement commenting on the cascading power failure of last Monday which affected over 15 million people in a four-state area, the President expressed the hope that the legislation we are proposing would be considered promptly and favorably by the Congress. We share the President's sense of urgency about this legislation and are appreciative of the continuing interest demonstrated by the President and the Congress in
this vital area of reliability of electric power service since the Northeast Power Failure of November, 1965.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that the enactment of this bill would be in accord with the program of the President. Respectfully,
Lee C. WHITE, Chairman.
THE ELECTRIC POWER RELIABILITY ACT of 1967-A SHORT EXPLANATION
The proposed Electric Power Reliability Act of 1967, submitted to Congress by the Federal Power Commission on June 8, 1967, with the support of the President, is designed to enhance the reliability and efficiency of electric bulk power systems. It would do so by creating new mechanisms for coordination among utilities, by assuring that all utility systems are given a chance to take advantage of new technology, and by reviewing proposals to build extra-high-voltage transmission lines to determine whether they are in the public interest. Extra-highvoltage lines are those that transmit power at more than 200,000 volts (200 kilovolts).
The FPC bill would apply equally to all bulk power systems in the country, whether owned by private investors, local or State agencies, the Federal government, or members of a co-operative. A bulk power system comprises facilities which generate power and deliver it to distribution lines, but not the distribution lines or distribution facilities themselves.
Under the bill the electric systems would establish regional councils to coordinate planning for further interconnection and construction of bulk power supply facilities. The councils would review existing facilities and proposed additions, and would propose further plans. Every system in a region would be a member of, or be represented on the regional council. The FPC would have non-voting representatives on each council. Although the FPC would pass on their basic organization to insure fairness, the councils would function independently. As a council formulated a plan for its region, it would submit it to the FTC for approval. If the Commission found a plan to be consistent with the ob-,jectives of the Act. limited immunity from antitrust suits could be granted. provided the Commission found the impact on competition insubstantial or clearly outweighed by other public interest factors. Regional councils would conduct studies designed to further reliability of service, and could propose reliability standards for issuance by the FPC as mandatory requirements.
The building of extra-high-voltage lines receives special attention in the FPC bill. All proposals to build these lines would be filed with the Commission. Public notice of the proposal would be published and served on appropriate regional councils, Federal, State and local agencies and other interested persons. After six months, construction on a project could begin unless the Commission disapproved or suspended the proposal. If the proponent intended to take advantage of the Federal eminent domain powers the bill offers, suspension would be automatic. Suspension would be for an initial period of up to a year, but could be extended if the Commission recommended specific modification or scheduled a formal hearing. Projects found, after opportunity for hearing. to be inconsistent with the objectives of the Act could not be constructed. The Commission could allow construction to go forward immediately where it determines that an emergency exists.
Any issues of land use, including preservation of scenic or historic sites. would be specially considered. Responsible Federal, State and local agencies would have the opportunity to file comments, and the Commission would defer to their views on local land
use questions unless doing so would be inconsistent with the objectives of the Act. Other provisions of the bill would allow the Commission to require interconnections and energy exchanges between utilities where the public interest so required. The Commission already has this power where a complaint is filed with it, but under the new legislation it could initiate such action itself. The bill would require FPC approval before a utility could abandon a bulk power service to another utility system. The bill would also empower the FPC to set up a National Electric Studies Committee with a broad mandate to investigate major reliability, planning and operation problems and stimulate scientific interest in solving them.
ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ELECTRIC POWER RELIABILITY ACT OF 1967
The principal provision of the proposed Electric Power Reliability Act of 1967 is section 2, which would enact a new Part IV of the Federal Power Act. The new Part would be added in order to promote the policy. expressed in present section 202(a) of the Federal Power Act, of assuring an abundant supply of electric energy with the greatest possible economy and with regard to the proper utilization and conservation of natural resources.
Section 401(a) of the proposed Part IV would make its provision applicable to all bulk power systems in the United States. Section 401(d) defines "bulk power supply facilities" as facilities for generation or transmission which furnish power to points of distribution.
Section 401(b) would set out the objectives of Part IV: which is intended to further the National Policy, already mentioned, expressed by present section 202(a). This would be accomplished
By enhancing the reliability of bulk power supply;
By strengthening existing mechanisms for coordination in the electric utility industry and establishing new ones;
By encouraging comprehensive development of power resources of each areas and region of the United States so as to take advantage of advancing technology while maintaining proper regard for conservation of land, scenic values, and other limited resources;
By providing that all utility systems and their customers have access to the benefits of coordination and advancing technology on fair and reasonable terms;
By assuring as far as feasible that extrahigh-voltage facilities include sufficient capacity to meet area, regional and interregional needs for transmission capacity, including the reserve capacity needed for reliability;
By respecting the territorial integrity of utility service areas to the extent consistent with public interest; and
By drawing on the cooperation of all segments (public. private and cooperative) of the electric utility industry.
These objectives are referred to as the criteria for Commission action in several other sections of the proposed Part IV.
Proposed section 401(c) defines the term "person" for purposes of Part IV. The use of that term in Part IV differs from its use elsewhere in the Federal Power Act in that it is here defined to include a "person", a "municipality" or a "State", all as defined in section 3 of the Federal Power Act, and any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States. This subsection also makes clear that the term covers all "persons", whether privately, cooperatively, Federally or otherwise publicly owned.
Proposed section 401(d), already referred to, defines "bulk power supply facilities" as facilities for generation or transmission which furnish power to points of distribution. It further provides that under section
413 the Commission would be empowered to classify or exempt facilities not material to attaining the objectives of Part IV.
Proposed section 401 (e) defines extra-highvoltage facilities", which are subject to the special provisions of section 409. As used in the proposed Part IV, the term means transmission lines and associated facilities designed to be capable of operation at a nominal voltage higher than 200 kilovolts between phase conductors for alternating current, or between poles in the case of direct current, the construction of which is commenced two years or more after enactment of Part IV.
Proposed section 402 relates Part IV to the existing porvisions of the Federal Power Act. Subsection (a) states that Part IV supplements Parts I, II and III in order further to promote the reliability, efficiency, and economy of bulk power supply, and provides that nothing in Part IV would modify or abridge authority granted under Parts I, II and III, unless specifically so provided. Subsection (b) would make the administrative, procedural and enforcement provisions of other Parts applicable to Part IV. These include provisions for filing reports, complaints by State agencies and other, investigations, hearings, rules and regulations, staff appointments, publication, judicial review, enforcement and penalties.
Proposed section 403 expresses the policy that the purposes of Part IV should be attained as far as possible by cooperation among all persons engaged in bulk power ' supply, regardless of their nature.
Section 404 would deal with the organizations that would bear much of the responsibility for electrical coordination. Section 404(a) first provides that, after consultation, under procedures that would be prescribed by the Commission, with persons engaged or interested in bulk power supply, and with appropriate Federal agencies and State commissions, the Commission would secure the establishment of appropriate and effective regional organizations and procedures to carry out regional and interregional coordination. These organizations, or "regional councils", would be open to membership (either direct or indirect by appropriate representation) on the part of each electric system in the region regardless of the nature of its ownership. In appropriate cases, a system could belong to more than one regional council. The Commission would designate representatives from among its staff, who would participate in all aspects of the regional councils' work except the ultimate adoption of plans or any other council actions.
Administration of the provisions of section 404 might vary with the circumstances of time and place, and with the degree to which regional and interregional coordination had progressed. Nevertheless, the following suggests one general pattern by which it might be carried out.
The Commission, after consulting with persons engaged in bulk power supply, State commissions, Federal agencies having an interest in the matter (e.g., the Bureau of Reclamation, Bonneville Power Administration, and similar bodies), and distributors of electric energy, would establish (and from time to time modify) regions for the interconnection and coordination of bulk power facilities. Consultation would most probably be on an individual basis for major bulk power suppliers and State commissions, with group representatives for the smaller bulk power systems and the distributors. Consultation would cover all bulk power suppliers and distributors in the region and the State commissions of all States wholly or partly within the region.
The persons within each region that were engaged in bulk power supply or distribution of electric energy would be urged to create a regional council, which would be
fairly representative of all such persons and be provided by them with sufficient funds to carry out its functions (including the employment of bulk power experts and other permanent staff). Representation on the council might be direct or indirect. but each major bulk power supplier should probably be directly represented while the total number of representatives is kept down to efficient dimensions.
The regional council's statement of organization, required by section 404(b) of the proposed bill, would set forth such matters as the following:
(1) the number of representatives and the persons or groups represented by each; (2) how the council would arrive at final decisions, and a fair and reasonable method of hearing and publishing minority views; (3) any other rules or by-laws it might adopt, including provisions for notice to the Commission and to the State commission of any State wholly or partly within the region of meetings of the council or any subsidiary body it might create, in order that the Commission might participate as contemplated by section 404(x) by designating staff officials to assist in the formulation of agenda, council discussions and council studies and so that the State commissions might participate as they saw fit; and
(4) such other information as the Commission requests. On submission of a statement of organization the Commission could call for consultation on any aspect of the statement it considered inconsistent with the objectives of Part IV or the proper functioning of the council, and could propose alternatives or modifications. The Commission might also determine by order whether the statement was consistent with the objectives of Part IV, and if not, modify it or set it aside. Amendments to a statement of organization would be treated in the same way.
On approval of its statement of organization, the regional council could be expected to undertake the following duties:
(1) to prepare and keep current a forecast of the electrical needs of the region in which it functions covering a reasonable period of years in the future. The forecast should include a determination of the facilities (including generation) needed during such period to achieve the most efficient, economical, and reliable interconnection of the region, as well as appropriate interconnection and coordination between regions.
(2) to conduct stability studies for its region, contemplating both present loads and the loads forecast under the preceding paragraph.
(3) to develop appropriate criteria for reliable planning and operation of bulk power facilities for recommendation to the Commission under section 408 of the proposed bill.
(4) to prepare outline plans for generation, transmission, and interconnection within the region (and to adjacent regions) which are best adapted to the reliability and power needs of the region.
(5) to develop plans for the coordinated operation of generation and transmission facilities of the region (and of future or presently possible coordination with other regions). These plans should include provisions for automatic load shedding and other emergency procedures, regulation and inspection of system control devices, and provisions for restoration of service after an outage, as well as plans for operation under normal conditions.
(6) to encourage and strengthen existing coordinating organizations within the region and new organizations where appropriate.
(7) to provide a forum wherein projects for construction of bulk power facilities can be examined by all persons engaged in bulk power supply or in distribution of elec
tric energy who would be affected by such projects, and modifications and legitimate objections thereto can be suggested and discussed.
(8) to give at least preliminary consideration to land use problems raised by construction proposals, and to consult, where appropriate. with local, State, interstate and Federal agencies having an interest in these problems.
(9) to consult with other regional councils on common problems and possibilities for interregional coordination.
(10) to do all other things necessary and appropriate for the most efficient development, coordination and use of the power resources of the region.
Section 404(b) would provide that each regional council would file an organizational statement with the Commission, together with any amendments later adopted. These statements would be available for public inspection. Within 30 days after adoption by the council, any plan of coordination, either regional or interregional, developed by the council, would be submitted to the Commission under such rules as the Commission prescribed. Submitted plans would have quasi-official status. Since the planning process is continuous, Commission rules and participation in the council work will have to define the stages at which amendments must be filed with the Commission. The Commission would make these plans available for public inspection, and would consider them in exercising its responsibilities under all Parts (including Part IV) of the Federal Power Act. When any plan for bulk power coordination was submitted to the Commission under proposed section 404(b), the council might accompany it with its comments or those of individual members. The Commission might, at any stage in the evaluation of a plan under section 404(e), call upon the council to confer with it on any aspect of the plan that appeared to require modification.
Section 404(c) would permit the Commission, after notice and opportunity for hearing, to determine by order whether any statement of organization filed under section 404 is consistent with the objectives of Part IV (as set out in section 401 (b). If a statement were determined to be inconsistent with those objectives, the Commission could modify it or set it aside. Under this section and the next, the bill would give the Commission discretion to initate review or not. If the Commission, having approved a statement, also found that its effect on competition would be insubstantial or would be clearly outweighed by other public interest considerations, actions pursuant to the statement would be immune from private antitrust suits.
Section 404 (d) would allow the Commission, after notice and opportunity for hearing, to determine whether a coordination plan was consistent with the objectives of Part IV. If the Commission found that the plan was not in the public interest it could modify it or set it aside. On a finding by the Commission that a plan it had approved would have an insubstantial effect on competition, or an effect clearly outweighed by other public interest considerations, actions pursuant to the plan would not be subject to private antitrust suits as long as the Commission's approval remained in effect.
Section 404(e) would direct the Commission to require annual reports from each regional council, and such additional reports as it deemed necessary or appropriate to carry out the objectives of Part IV. The Commission would in turn report to Congress annually on the effectiveness of the efforts at regional and interregional coordination made by the regional councils.
Section 404(f) would allow the Commission, if it found after notice and opportunity for hearing that any person engaged in gen
eration or transmission of electric energy unreasonably refused to participate either in the creation of a regional council or in effective regional or interregional coordination. it could order such participation to the extent it found necessary to carry out the objectives of Part IV. The Commission would expect to utilize such compulsory powers only after all reasonable attempts at consultation had failed to persuade the party concerned to take part in the creation or work of a regional council.
Section 405 would give the Commission authority, after consulting with the regional councils, to establish a national committee representative of all elements of the electric industry. This committee would facilitate interregional exchanges of views and experience, and would consolidate the industry's efforts to investigate major present and future problems in the planning and operation of bulk power supply facilities. It would also seek to stimulate interest among scientists and engineers in the challenges of achieving reliable and efficient bulk power supply.
Section 406 would allow the Commission to establish one or more advisory coordination review boards and to provide for appointment thereto of experts from the electric utility industry, the equipment manufacturers, and the academic and research communities, and of other persons (not Commission employees) drawn from the general public. These boards would assist the Commission in considering matters coming before it under Part IV.
Section 407 would require. subject to such rules as the Commission might prescribe. that all written agreements, and statements of all oral agreements. for coordinated planning or operation of bulk power supply facilities be lodged with the Commission. This would include, but not be limited to, agreements for joint ownership of such facilities.
Section 408 would provide that, on the recommendation of a regional council or on its own motion, and after consultation with the regional councils, and after public notice and opportunity to comment. the Commission could issue rules setting forth reasonable criteria to enhance reliable planning and operation of bulk power supply facilities in accordance with the objectives of Part IV. Such rules might apply to a particular region or regions or be of nationwide scope. As specified in section 402(b), the existing provisions of Part III of the Federal Power Act would be available to enforce compliance with such rules.
Section 409 deals with extra-high-voltage (EHV) facilities, which are defined in section 401(e). By virtue of that definition, section 409 will not govern EHV facilities whose construction starts within 2 years of enactment of Part IV. Subsection (a) would require any person proposing the construction of such facilities to file with the Commission, two years before it proposed to start construction, or at such other time as the Commission directed, its construction proposal. The proposal would include such information, including information as to the routing of the proposed line. as the Commission required to determine whether the construction and operation proposed was consistent with a plan developed by a regional council and with the objectives of Part IV, the filing would also state whether the proponent elected to seek rights-of-way under section 409(e), which provide for Federal eminent domain and for the securing of rights-ofway over Federal lands. Notice of a filing and of subsequent changes would appear in the Federal Register and be served on appropriate regional councils, Federal, state and local agencies, and any other interested persons, s the Commission required. Any interested person would have 60 days in which to comment on the filing.
Section 409 (b) would prohibit the con-
struction of any extra-high-voltage facility within 6 months after acceptance of a filing under subsection (a), and for such additional period during which a Commission suspense order was in effect. The Commission would issue a suspense order whenever the proponent elected to seek rights-of-way under subsection (e), or when the Commission concluded, in its discretion, within six months after the filing, that the proposal was inconsistent with an approved plan developed by a regional council or appeared otherwise not to be consistent with the objectives of Part IV. The order would summarize the Commission's reasons for the finding, and would be effective for an initial period, fixed in the Commission's discretion but not more than 12 months. The effectiveness of a suspense order that has not yet expired by its own terms could be extended by an order of the Commission recommending specific modifications in the project and setting forth conditions for its approval, or scheduling the matter for formal hearings, or both. In such a case, the proposal would remain suspended until ultimate disposition of the matter by the Commission. The Commission could, however, after public notice and consideration of such comments as were received within 30 days, terminate the suspense order on a finding that the proposal would be consistent with the objectives of Part IV.
Section 409(c) would direct the Commission to use informal procedures, including joint or separate conferences. to the fullest extent feasible in dealing with extra-highvoltage facilities applications under section 409. Notice and opportunity for hearing, however, would be required before the Commis- sion could finally disapprove a proposal or confer rights-of-way.
Section 409(d) would permit the Commission, at or before the period of suspension designated by the suspense order. to issue an order recommending specific modifications to the proposal and setting forth conditions for its approval, or to issue an order setting the matter for hearing. (Under the terms of section 409(b), this order would extend the effectiveness of the suspension.) If the modifications and conditions were accepted by the proponent, the Commission would be required to approve the proposal as modified and terminate the suspense order forthwith. If the modifications and conditions were not accepted, or if the Commission itself set the matter for hearing, the suspense order would remain effective until the Commission formally determined whether the proposal was consistent with the objectives of Part IV and issued a final order permitting or prohibiting the construction of the proposed facilities.
Section 409(e) sets forth the procedures which are available for obtaining rights-ofway. These procedures need not be used by the proponent of an extra-high-voltage construction project, but if the proponent did elect to use them a suspense order would be issued automatically. The subsection provides that, if the Commission at any time determined (after notice and opportunity for hearing) that a proposal was consistent with the objectives of Part IV, the proponent could secure rights-of-way over any lands except those owned by the United States by an eminent domain proceeding in the Federal district court of the district in which the land was located. The condemnor would be permitted to use the declaration of taking procedure provided by 40 U.S.C. 258a, 258b, and 258d. Alternatively, eminent domain proceedings could be brought in the state courts. Where a right-of-way over Federal lands was required, the finding that the proposal was consistent with the objectives of Part IV would automatically allow the proponent to have such right-of-way, subject to the applicable requirements of Part IV and such reasonable land-use conditions relating to
non-power matters as the Federal department or agency responsible for the lands affected prescribed. The Commission would include these conditions 1n its order. The administering department or agency would also have the right to protest within sixty days, only on the grounds that the Commission's order failed adequately to protect identified aesthetic and historic values. A protest would, until withdrawn, stay the Commission's order.
Section 409(f) would permit the Commission, when it determined that emergency conditions so required, to exempt persons from any requirements of section 409. It could do so on its own motion or on complaint, with or without notice, hearing or report, and on such conditions as it deemed necessary or appropriate. An emergency, for purposes of this subsection, would exist by reason of a sudden increase in demand for power or energy. a shortage thereof. a shortage of facilities or materials for generation or transmission of power or energy, including a. shortage of fuel or water for generation, or other causes. The wording of this subsection is largely based on section 202(c) of the present Federal Power Act.
Section 410 would set up a mechanism for determining questions of land use arising either in the regional planning process under section 404 or in the review of extra-highvoltage facilities proposals under section 409. Land use questions for these purposes, would include aesthetic considerations. Whenever such a question arises, formally or informally, the Commission would entertain written comments by Federal, interstate, state and local agencies responsible for land use planning in the affected region. The Commission would defer to the views of the responsible agency, if any existed, to resolve local land use questions unless it determined that a particular solution would be inconsistent with the objectives of Part IV. The subsection would also permit the use of joint boards of State and federal officials, as contemplated in section 209 of the Federal Power Act, to resolve land use questions.
Section 411 would permit the Commission, after notice and opportunity for hearing, to direct any person engaged in generation or transmission of electric energy to establish physical connection of its facilities with those of another person or persons engaged in generation, transmission or sale of electric energy. to sell energy to or exchange energy with such person. The Commission could do so on its own motion or on complaint, but would have to find that no undue burden would be imposed on the respondent by the interconnection order. It would also have to find that this action was necessary or appropriate to carry out the objectives of Part IV. The Commission could prescribe the terms and conditions of the arrangement to be made between the parties affected by the order. This section is largely based upon section 202(b) of the present Federal Power Act.
Section 412 would prohibit the abandonment of any bulk power supply service, or of any part of a person's bulk power supply facilities, if the effect would be abandonment, curtailment, or impairment of bulk power service, without the advance approval of the Commission. Approval could be granted after notice and opportunity for hearing, on a finding that the abandonment or curtailment would be consistent with the objectives of Part IV. This section is based on section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717f(b).
Section 413 would give the Commission power to exempt facilities, persons or activities from any requirement of Part IV or from any rule or regulation thereunder, in order to avoid excessive burdens on persons engaged in bulk power supply. regional councils, and the public. It could issue such ex
emptions, by rule, after notice and opportunity for hearing and on determining that the exemption was necessary and appropriate to carry out the objectives of Part IV. Conditions could be attached to an exemption, and it could, after notice and opportunity for hearings, be revoked.
This section could be the basis for exemption of classes of facilities falling within the terms of the proposed bill. but not material to its objectives. Many lines, for example, that supply power to a single industrial customer having no generation of its own might fall within the definition of extra-highvoltage facilities; yet it might be appropriate to exempt some or all of them.