    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                     POWERING UP CLEAN ENERGY: INVESTMENTS
                   TO MODERNIZE AND EXPAND THE ELECTRIC GRID

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                            SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE
                                 CLIMATE CRISIS
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                  MAY 20, 2021

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 117-4

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                www.govinfo.gov
       Printed for the use of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    44-954                      WASHINGTON : 2021

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS

                        One Hundred Seventeenth Congress

                          KATHY CASTOR, Florida, Chair
    SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana,
    JULIA BROWNLEY, California             Ranking Member
    JARED HUFFMAN, California            GARY PALMER, Alabama
    A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia         BUDDY CARTER, Georgia
    MIKE LEVIN, California               CAROL MILLER, West Virginia
    SEAN CASTEN, Illinois                KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
    JOE NEGUSE, Colorado                 DAN CRENSHAW, Texas
    VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas              ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
                                     ------
                    Ana Unruh Cohen, Majority Staff Director
                      Marty Hall, Minority Staff Director
                            climatecrisis.house.gov

                               C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                       STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

                                                                       Page
    Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Florida, and Chair, Select Committee on the Climate Crisis:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
        Prepared Statement...........................................     3
    Hon. Garrett Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Select Committee on the
      Climate Crisis:
        Opening Statement............................................     4

                                   WITNESSES

    Linda Apsey, President and CEO, ITC Holdings Corp
        Oral Statement...............................................     6
        Prepared Statement...........................................     8
    Donnie Colston, Director, Utility Department, International
      Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
        Oral Statement...............................................    12
        Prepared Statement...........................................    13
    Emily Sanford Fisher, General Counsel, Corporate Strategy, and
      Senior Vice President, Clean Energy, Edison Electric Institute
        Oral Statement...............................................    15
        Prepared Statement...........................................    18
    Michael Skelly, Founder and CEO, Grid United
        Oral Statement...............................................    21
        Prepared Statement...........................................    22

                           SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Report from Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, Transmission
      Projects Ready to Go: Plugging into America's Untapped
      Renewable Resources, submitted for the record by Ms. Castor....    44
    Report from American Council on Renewable Energy, Investment Tax
      Credit for Regionally Significant Electricity Transmission
      Lines: A Description and Analysis, submitted for the record by
      Ms. Castor.....................................................    44
    Letter from the American Council on Renewable Energy to the
      Select Committee in support of investments and policies to
      upgrade and expand the electric grid, submitted for the record
      by Ms. Castor..................................................    44
    Letter from the Solar Energy Industry Association (SEIA) to Chair
      Castor in support of transmission investments to help achieve
      100 percent clean electricity, submitted for the record by Ms.
      Castor.........................................................    48

                                    APPENDIX

    Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Linda Apsey...    50
    Questions for the Record from Hon. Jared Huffman to Linda Apsey..    52
    Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Donnie Colston    52
    Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Emily Sanford
      Fisher.........................................................    54
    Questions for the Record from Hon. Anthony Gonzalez to Emily Sanfo
      rd Fisher......................................................    56
    Questions for the Record from Hon. Mike Levin to Emily Sanford
      Fisher.........................................................    56
    Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Michael Skelly    58

                           POWERING UP CLEAN ENERGY:
                      INVESTMENTS TO MODERNIZE AND EXPAND
                               THE ELECTRIC GRID

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 20, 2021

                         U.S. House of Representatives,
                        Select Committee on the Climate Crisis,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a.m., via
    Zoom, Hon. Kathy Castor [chairwoman of the committee]
    presiding.
        Present: Representatives Castor, Bonamici, Brownley,
    Huffman, Levin, Casten, Graves, Palmer, Carter, Miller,
    Armstrong, Crenshaw, and Gonzalez.
        Ms. Castor. The committee will come to order.
        Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
    recess of the committee at any time.
        As a reminder, members participating in a hearing remotely
    should be visible on camera throughout the meeting.
        As with in-person meetings, members are responsible for
    controlling their own microphones. And members can be muted by
    staff only to avoid inadvertent background noise.
        In addition, statements, documents, or motions must be
    submitted to the electronic repository to
    sccc.repository@mail.house.gov.
        Finally, members or witnesses experiencing technical
    problems should inform the committee staff immediately.
        Well, good morning, everyone, and thank you all for joining
    this remote hearing. Today we are looking at the benefits for
    our country and workers that come from modernizing and
    expanding the electric grid.
        I now recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening
    statement.
        Well, we started this Congress with hearings focused on the
    millions of jobs we can create in clean energy and resilience
    and then the growing risks and costs of inaction. Once again
    this week, we are seeing how extreme climate-fueled events harm
    Americans across the country and put lives at risk. Rising
    temperatures and the climate crisis are amplifying these
    impacts.
        Heavy rains and flooding in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and
    Arkansas have left homes, businesses, and entire communities
    under water. Over the weekend, more than 1,000 people in
    southern California were forced to evacuate their homes when a
    wildfire broke out in the Santa Monica mountains.
        Current drought conditions and a wildfire in the middle of
    May have already heightened fears of another long and brutal
    fire season on the West Coast, and our hearts go out to the
    families dealing with these disasters.
        And, Ranking Member Graves, our thoughts are with you and
    your constituents in the Baton Rouge area especially.
        Our efforts here in Congress must focus on solutions to
    help them, not only in the near term, but also the long term,
    to avoid the catastrophic climate consequences for our
    grandchildren--our children and our grandchildren. One of those
    important solutions is to modernize and expand the electric
    grid, making it stronger and more resilient.
        Wildfires out West and cold snaps in the South have left
    Americans in the dark and in danger just in the last 4 months.
    And climate-fueled disasters continue to hit our energy
    infrastructure, which is already in need of major repairs.
        Nationwide, the American Society of Civil Engineers gives
    American energy infrastructure a C-minus rating. We don't want
    a C-minus. We are America. This is America. We can do better
    than that. And when we do, hopefully together, we will create a
    lot of jobs and mend our supply chains through Buy American.
        Building a modern grid can increase our energy capabilities
    and improve efficiency across America, all while ensuring
    greater reliability. The energy catastrophe in Texas
    demonstrated the need for safeguarding the Nation's
    disconnected grids with better backup and interconnections.
        We have many innovations at the ready. We just need to
    deploy them. This also will create good-paying jobs that will
    help jump-start the economy. According to a recent report from
    Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, there are already almost two
    dozen shovel-ready projects that will reduce connection,
    improve reliability, and put over 1 million Americans to work.
    Another report by the American Council on Renewable Energy
    shows that an investment tax credit for priority high-voltage
    transmission lines would lead to about 650,000 new jobs.
        Both reports show that investing in our grid will create
    jobs. That is why renewing and modernizing the grid is the
    centerpiece of President Biden's American Jobs Plan. By passing
    the President's infrastructure plan, we can put thousands--
    hundreds of thousands--of people to work, laying thousands of
    miles of transmission lines that will connect entire regions
    across America. It is a historic investment and a once-in-a-
    generation opportunity to invest in America so we come back
    stronger.
        We already have the innovative technologies needed to
    increase the efficiency, capacity, and flexibility of our
    electric grid, and the experts here today will help explain
    how. We know we need to act quickly. As we expand clean energy,
    we will also reduce pollution and lower electricity bills and
    will build new transmission lines so that every city, town, and
    county can access America's affordable and abundant wind and
    solar energy.
        We must set ambitious goals via a clean energy and an
    energy-efficiency standard. Many States are way ahead of us on
    this, and we need to catch up. Cleaning up the power sector
    will also help us reduce carbon pollution from the
    transportation, building, and industrial sectors. Many
    automakers have already announced their commitment to electric
    vehicles, and I loved watching President Biden this week take a
    drive in the new Ford F-150 in Michigan, where he previewed the
    new electric pickup truck and renewed his commitment to the
    nationwide charging network.
        This is how we solve the climate crisis, by unleashing
    American innovation and building the cars of tomorrow in
    America.
        Today's witnesses will give us important insights on the
    road ahead of us as we double down on clean energy in a way
    that prioritizes workers and environmental justice. I look
    forward to our conversation.
        At this time, I will recognize Ranking Member Garret Graves
    for a 5-minute opening statement.
        [The statement of Ms. Castor follows:]

                    Opening Statement of Chair Kathy Castor

                    Hearing on ``Powering Up Clean Energy:
            Investments to Modernize and Expand the Electric Grid''

                     Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                                  May 20, 2021

                            As Prepared for Delivery

        We started this Congress with hearings focused on the millions of
    jobs we can create in clean energy and resilience, and the growing
    risks and costs of doing nothing. Once again this week, we are seeing
    how extreme, climate-fueled events harm Americans across the country
    and put lives at risk. Rising temperatures and the climate crisis are
    amplifying these impacts.
        Heavy rains and flooding in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and
    Arkansas have left homes, businesses, and entire communities
    underwater. Over the weekend, more than a thousand people in Southern
    California were forced to evacuate their homes, when a wildfire broke
    out in the Santa Monica mountains. Current drought conditions--and a
    wildfire in the middle of May--have already heightened fears of another
    long and brutal fire season on the West Coast. Our hearts go out to the
    families dealing with these disasters. And our efforts here in Congress
    must focus on solutions to help them, not only in the near-term, but
    also to avoid catastrophic climate consequences for our children and
    grandchildren.
        One of those important solutions is to modernize and expand the
    electric grid, making it stronger and more resilient. Wildfires out
    west and cold snaps in the South have left Americans in the dark and in
    danger just in the last 4 months. Climate-fueled disasters continue to
    hit our energy infrastructure, which is already in need of major
    repairs. Nationwide, the American Society of Civil Engineers gives
    American energy infrastructure a C-minus rating. We don't want a C-
    minus. This is America, and we can do so much better. And when we do
    it, hopefully together, we will create a lot of jobs, and mend our
    supply chains with Buy American.
        Building a modern grid can increase our energy capabilities and
    improve efficiency across America, all while ensuring greater
    reliability. The energy catastrophe in Texas demonstrated the need for
    safeguarding the nation's disconnected grids with better backup and
    interconnections. We have many innovations at the ready, but need to
    deploy them--and this also can create good-paying jobs that will
    jumpstart our economy. According to a recent report from Americans for
    a Clean Energy Grid, there are already almost two dozen shovel-ready
    projects that will reduce congestion, improve reliability, and put over
    a million Americans to work. Another report--by the American Council on
    Renewable Energy--shows that an Investment Tax Credit for priority
    high-voltage transmission lines would lead to 650,000 new jobs.
        Both reports show that investing in our grid will create jobs
    across America. That's why renewing and modernizing the grid is a
    centerpiece of President Biden's American Jobs Plan. By passing the
    President's infrastructure plan, we can put hundreds of thousands of
    people to work laying thousands of miles of transmission lines that
    will connect entire regions of our nation. It is a historic
    investment--and a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in America
    so we're come back stronger.
        We already have the innovative technologies needed to increase the
    efficiency, capacity, and flexibility of our electric grid. The experts
    here today will highlight how, and we know we need to move quickly. As
    we expand clean energy, we'll also reduce pollution and lower
    electricity bills. And we'll build new transmission lines so that every
    city, town, and county can access America's affordable and abundant
    wind and solar energy. We must set ambitious goals via clean energy and
    energy efficiency standards. Many states are way ahead on this and we
    need to catch up.
        Cleaning up the power sector will also help us reduce carbon
    pollution from the transportation, buildings, and industrial sectors.
    Many automakers have already announced their commitment to electric
    vehicles. I loved watching President Biden drive the new Ford F-150 in
    Michigan, where he previewed the new electric pick-up truck and renewed
    his commitment to a nationwide charging network. This is how we solve
    the climate crisis--by unleashing American innovation and building the
    cars of tomorrow in America.
        Today's witnesses will give us important insights on the road ahead
    of us, as we double down on clean energy in a way that prioritizes
    workers and environmental justice. I look forward to our conversation.

        Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        And I do appreciate your recognition of some of the
    extraordinary challenges our folks are going through back at
    home. We recently had a storm this week where we got about 12
    inches of rain in about 8 hours. In fact, I think there was 1
    hour of time where we received about 4 inches of rain. So
    pretty incredible. I think my quick math was within about 8 to
    12 hours, our folks at home received as much rain as the
    average American does in--40 percent of the average rainfall in
    a year's time for the average American. So pretty incredible.
        But, in any case, I want to thank you for having this
    hearing. And, Madam Chair, as you know, every once in a while
    we don't agree, but in this case, in terms of updating our
    grid, I think this is an area where we absolutely share the
    same objectives. We have seen blackouts and brownouts all
    across the United States, and part of that is attributable to
    some of the grid issues. We also, I believe, have cyber
    vulnerabilities to much of our grid that needs to be addressed
    as we work to update the grid system. And so I want to
    reiterate that I think that we share that objective.
        As a matter of fact, in Ms. Sanford's testimony, she makes
    reference to a Princeton study that concludes that our grid
    capacity in terms of high-voltage transmission is going to need
    to triple between now and approximately 2050. Let me say that
    again. The capacity of high-voltage transmission in our grid,
    according to a Princeton analysis, indicates that it is going
    have to triple in capacity between now and 2050. And so that is
    very different than the status quo.
        Madam Chair, this administration has talked a lot about
    infrastructure. And I, once again, I share their concern for
    infrastructure. I think, like, roads, bridges, flood
    protection, I think that our ports, waterways, and airports are
    all Federal obligations, Federal responsibilities. They are
    part of the core infrastructure that the Federal Government has
    an obligation to work on. But my large concern with what this
    administration is trying to do is that putting an extraordinary
    amount of taxpayer dollars into a system that is incapable of
    delivering only results in more bad outcomes. And let me
    clarify what I am talking about there.
        You have heard, for example, that the average road project
    now takes 7 years just to get through an environmental review.
    I have no desire, and I am confident no one on this committee
    has any desire, to go trash the environment. But if we have, I
    believe, tripled the amount of time it takes to do an
    environmental review from when this law was first passed, we
    have got to take a fresh look at that. Let me say it again. Not
    to shortcut our review of the environmental impacts but to make
    sure that we are staying focused on the core objectives of that
    law, making sure that we are truly focused on the best
    environmental outcomes, but also staying focused on the project
    outcomes, the project objectives, because the worst kind of
    project in the world is a project that never gets finished.
        Madam Chair, as you know, I have spent from my teenage life
    on involved in infrastructure. And it is so frustrating to work
    with the Federal Government. They are an unreliable Federal
    partner. And I think that if we are going to realize the grid
    transformation that is needed, we have to make fundamental
    changes to our permitting process, to the way that we develop
    and we deliver projects for grid reform or modernization, as
    well as other types of infrastructure projects.
        And so I think that has got to be a very important, really,
    just a fundamental component of the recommendations we make
    moving forward on how to ensure that the preconstruction
    activities don't monopolize all of the funding all of the time
    to where we never see ultimately the outcomes that all
    Americans deserve.
        Last thing, Madam Chair, I want to make reference to my
    strong concerns about, I think, some of the confusing energy
    policies that we are seeing pushed right now by this
    administration. Madam Chair, I am just totally baffled. Months
    ago, we saw President Biden being deemed a hero for shutting
    down the Keystone Pipeline. Yet months later, we saw terrorist
    and hacker labels applied to the folks that shut down the
    Colonial Pipeline. How is it that the President can be a hero
    for shutting down a pipeline, while others are considered
    terrorists or hackers for shutting down a pipeline that had
    profound impacts on the U.S. economy, on folks all across the
    eastern seaboard?
        The same administration just--after years of just trashing
    the Trump administration and deeming them as being complicit in
    Russian activities, then just lifted sanctions to allow the
    Nord Stream pipeline to send Russian gas to our friends in
    Europe that has a higher emissions profile.
        I am really struggling with what appears to be the
    hypocrisy here, and I think that we have got to step in and
    make sure that we are making the right decisions for the global
    environment, for our allies, and for a clean energy future that
    is based on America's resources.
        Thank you. I yield back.
        Ms. Castor. I thank the ranking member.
        And I think everyone shares the concern over the Nord
    Stream pipeline. I know the Biden administration didn't change
    its opposition to that pipeline. But I think it does highlight
    the need for maybe a hearing in this committee on harmful
    pollution from frack gas and other fossil development,
    especially in the wake of the IEA's report this week that was a
    surprise to everyone about--not a surprise about the surge we
    needed in clean energy but that they recommend no new oil and
    gas development, no new fossil development. So we will be
    talking about that in the days ahead, I am certain.
        Mr. Graves. Madam Chair, I would welcome that hearing. I
    would love to do one on Nord Stream 2 and also on CCS activity.
    So thank you. Count us in.
        Ms. Castor. Without objection, members who wish to enter
    opening statements into the record will have 5 business days to
    do so.
        Now I want to welcome our witnesses. We will hear from
    leaders in the electric power industry on how investments to
    modernize and expand transmission infrastructure can create
    jobs, integrate more renewable energy, boost grid reliability,
    and protect the public health.
        Linda Apsey is the President and CEO of ITC Holdings Corp.,
    which is the largest independent electricity transmission
    company in the United States. Based in Michigan, the company
    owns and operates high-voltage transmission infrastructure in
    Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, and
    Oklahoma, with plans underway to expand in Wisconsin.
        Donnie Colston is the Director of the Utility Department at
    the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, IBEW. He
    helps locals with collective bargaining agreements, working
    conditions, safety-related work practices, and apprenticeship
    training. A utility lineman, Mr. Colston started his career in
    transmission and distribution construction before working as an
    electric troubleman.
        Emily Sanford Fisher is the General Counsel, Corporate
    Secretary, and Senior Vice President for Clean Energy at the
    Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned
    electric companies. Ms. Fisher manages EEI's litigation and
    legal affairs, and she oversees and coordinates strategic clean
    energy engagement across EEI and across the Federal Government.
        And Michael Skelly is the Founder and President of Grid
    United. He is a renewable energy entrepreneur and pioneer in
    the U.S. wind industry, who currently leads an early-stage
    transmission development company. Mr. Skelly was previously
    Founder and President of Clean Line Energy, a company that
    successfully permitted some of the longest transmission lines
    in the United States over the last 50 years.
        Without objection, the witnesses' written statements will
    be made part of the record.
        With that, Ms. Apsey, you are now recognized for 5 minutes
    for your testimony. Welcome.

     STATEMENTS OF MS. LINDA APSEY, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
      OFFICER, ITC HOLDINGS CORP. ; MR. DONNIE COLSTON, DIRECTOR,
      UTILITY DEPARTMENT, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL
                               WORKERS;
    MS. EMILY SANFORD FISHER, GENERAL COUNSEL, CORPORATE SECRETARY
    & SVP, CLEAN ENERGY, EDISON ELECTRIC INSTITUTE; AND MR. MICHAEL
                  SKELLY, FOUNDER AND CEO, GRID UNITED

                        STATEMENT OF LINDA APSEY

        Ms. Apsey. Great. Good morning. And thank you, Chair
    Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and distinguished members of the
    Select Committee. I am Linda Apsey, President and Chief
    Executive Officer of ITC Holdings Corp., the Nation's largest
    independent electric transmission company. Thank you for
    holding this hearing and for addressing the clean energy
    economy and the future of the electric transmission grid.
        Our Nation's high-voltage transmission system holds the key
    to unlocking renewable energy potential in much the same way
    the interstate highway system provided a roadmap to economic
    prosperity in the middle of the 20th century. Like the
    construction of the interstate highways, transformative
    investments in the high-voltage grid will not simply just
    happen. It will require visionary leadership from Federal and
    state leaders, as well as cooperation among numerous
    stakeholders and the Nation's electric utilities that oversee
    the grid.
        If we are successful, this transformation of the grid can
    drive significant economic, environmental, reliability, and
    resiliency benefits for this and future generations to come.
        While recent years have seen some policy steps taken to
    encourage transmission investment, more needs to be done to
    address the three major hurdles to transmission development:
    planning, cost allocation, and siting. I will first focus on
    the significant benefits of transmission investment and then on
    Federal policies that can help spur a reliable and affordable
    low-carbon electric system.
        Electric transmission infrastructure is a strategic asset
    that can provide economic benefits and accelerate clean energy
    adoption. Modernizing the electric grid presents a unique
    opportunity to create hundreds of thousands of jobs. It also
    can generate sustained, long-term, economywide benefits, while
    helping to address decarbonization goals. The World Resource
    Institute estimates that for every $1 invested in U.S.
    transmission infrastructure, it creates approximately $2.40 in
    economic benefits.
        While transmission drives significant benefits, the
    regulations and regional planning process we currently have are
    insufficient to address the challenges we face. There is still
    much to be done at the Federal agency level to fix these
    processes and facilitate the necessary investment.
        First, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission can improve
    planning processes by requiring regions to recognize and count
    all of the benefits of the given transmission project. Today,
    we only reflect whether the project is a reliability or
    economic project in our planning studies. We would strongly
    recommend that FERC also require planning studies to include
    state clean energy standards and realistic estimates for
    electrification growth.
        In addition, new cost allocation policies are required to
    provide for the expeditious integration of the significant
    amount of renewable energy projects waiting to be connected to
    the grid.
        FERC should also repeal or modify unhelpful policies, like
    Order 1000, that have slowed regional transmission development
    and simply made it more complex. The introduction of so-called
    competition is not competition. It is nothing more than a
    regulated bureaucratic bidding process with little appreciable
    benefit to the consumer.
        With President Biden's goal of decarbonizing the U.S.
    electricity sector by 2035, high-voltage transmission is taking
    center stage. The proposal for an investment tax credit for
    transmission could offer a valuable tool to stimulate large
    regional transmission projects that would connect remote
    renewable resources to our population centers. A well-designed
    tax credit for transmission can lower costs for large projects
    and make it easier to achieve cost allocation agreements, which
    is a key hurdle to project approval and construction.
        In short, we support the bipartisan goal of investing in
    the Nation's high-voltage electric transmission grid. We are
    prepared and stand ready to work with all stakeholders to meet
    the climate challenge and build a 21st century energy economy.
        I thank you for the opportunity to testify before this
    committee, and I look forward to working together to invest in
    America's clean energy future.
        [The statement of Ms. Apsey follows:]

                  Statement of Linda Apsey, President and CEO
                               ITC Holdings Corp.

                         U.S. House of Representatives

                     Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                          ``Powering Up Clean Energy:
            Investments to Modernize and Expand the Electric Grid''

                                  May 20, 2021

        Thank you, Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and distinguished
    members of the Select Committee, for inviting me to testify on the
    critical topic of modernizing and expanding the electric grid.
        I am Linda Apsey, Chief Executive Officer of ITC Holdings Corp.
    (ITC). As the largest independent electricity transmission company in
    the country, ITC owns and operates electric transmission assets in
    Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma with
    a combined peak load of 26,000 megawatts along 16,000 circuit miles of
    transmission lines. Since we have no geographic constraints, ITC is
    also focused on new areas where significant transmission system
    improvements are needed. We are proud of our record of investing in the
    grid to improve resilience, lower costs, and provide access to
    affordable renewable resources for our customers.
        Thank you for holding this hearing and for addressing the clean
    energy economy and the future of the grid. The Select Committee Staff
    Report and Action Plan offer a comprehensive menu of policy options
    designed to spur investment in grid infrastructure and large-scale
    renewable energy needed to decarbonize the electric system in an
    efficient and affordable manner that also will enhance resiliency and
    reliability. Many of these ideas are now carried forward in President
    Biden's American Jobs plan.
        While recent years have seen some policy steps taken to encourage
    transmission investment, more needs to be done to address the three
    major hurdles to transmission development--planning, permitting, and
    cost allocation. I will first focus on the benefits of transmission
    investment and then on federal policies that can spur a reliable and
    affordable low-carbon electric system.

    Transmission Investment Can Accelerate Clean Energy and Create Jobs

        Our nation's high voltage transmission system holds the key to
    unlocking the renewable energy future, in much the same way the
    interstate highway system unlocked prosperity in the middle of the 20th
    century. Like interstate highways, transformative investments in the
    high voltage grid will not simply happen. Modernization and expansion
    of our electric grid will require visionary leadership from federal and
    state leaders, as well as cooperation among numerous stakeholders,
    including the nation's electric utilities. If we are successful, this
    transformation of the grid can drive significant economic and
    environmental benefits for this generation and the next.
        Since our inception, ITC has played a critical role in the
    transformation of the generation fleet to cleaner and more sustainable
    generation sources. While we have done much--having already connected
    about 6800 megawatts of renewable capacity to the grid--much remains to
    be done.
        Consider a few of the trends contributing to our changing energy
    landscape:

          Consumers, governments, corporations and other
    organizations pursuing sustainability goals are demanding clean energy.
          Traditional baseload generating plants are being retired
    at an unprecedented pace, as evidenced by this chart showing a
    significant shift in generating capacity connected to ITC Midwest's
    transmission system since 2007.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4954A.001

        To meet the demands of customers and policymakers, utilities and
    renewable energy developers are adding wind and solar farms in Iowa and
    across the upper Midwest. MISO, the regional grid operator, reports
    more than 20 gigawatts of renewable energy--enough to power 14 million
    homes--is proposed in Iowa, Minnesota and western Wisconsin.
        The need for major new transmission investments to support the
    future energy system will only grow. Our three largest customers
    announced significant generation transformation plans for the years
    ahead, and at least 30 utilities have made commitments to lower their
    emissions by 80% or more. Investing in transmission now will allow this
    transition to take place while maintaining affordability and enhancing
    system resilience.
        The need for significant new investment in transmission to support
    clean energy and reduce emissions may sound daunting and expensive, but
    it does not need to be. A recent study from Americans for a Clean
    Energy Grid concludes that a ``transmission-first'' approach to clean
    energy deployment will save customers money compared to current
    electricity costs.\1\ Transmission-first means planning and building
    transmission infrastructure and upgrading existing systems in areas
    ripe for developing abundant and cheap wind and solar generation. By
    contrast, the current practice of planning incremental additions to the
    system for each new generation source imposes significantly higher
    costs over the long run.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Consumer, Employment, and Environmental Benefits of Electricity
    Transmission Expansion
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    in the Eastern U.S. https://cleanenergygrid.org/wp-content/uploads/
    2020/10/Consumer-Employment-and-Environmental-Benefits-of-Transmission-
    Expansion-in-the-Eastern-U.S..pdf
        Returning to an earlier analogy, the interstate highway system was
    proactively built on a vision of future access and need. If it had been
    built the way transmission is today, based on incremental demand, we
    would not have nationwide highway infrastructure and millions would be
    denied access to its economic benefits. To unlock our energy future, we
    need to begin work today on a transmission system that prioritizes
    renewable resource development, anticipates growth, and expands access
    to reliable, low-carbon electricity for all.
        In addition, investments in transmission can create and support
    thousands of jobs, both directly during construction and over the
    lifetime of the investments. According to a recent report on
    transmission benefits released by the WIRES Coalition and London
    Economics, job creation and economic benefits achieved through
    transmission development can be substantial and long-lasting.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Repowering America: Transmission investment for economic
    stimulus and climate change. https://wiresgroup.com/repowering-america-
    transmission-investment-for-economic-stimulus-and-climate-change/

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Transmission in Action: MISO Multi-Value Projects (MVPs)

        There are many real-world examples of transmission development
    leading to increased penetration of low-cost renewables. For instance,
    ITC constructed major portions of MISO's Multi-Value Project portfolio
    in the Upper Midwest that were approved in 2011. These 17 high-voltage
    projects were designed to deliver renewable energy to load centers in
    the Midwest to facilitate compliance with state renewable energy
    standards and enhance grid reliability.
        Retrospective analysis of these major projects confirms that they
    have led to significant renewable development, enhanced reliability and
    lower costs for customers. MISO affirmed the savings benefits from the
    MVPs in its most recent Triennial Review, issued in 2017.\3\ That
    review indicated that the MVP portfolio will generate benefits in the
    range of $2.20 to $3.40 for each dollar spent. MISO estimates that the
    average electricity customer in the region will see $33 in annual
    benefits for a $12 per year investment in the entire MVP portfolio.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ MTEP17 MVP Triennial Review.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://cdn.misoenergy.org/
    MTEP17%20MVP%20Triennial%20Review%20Report117065.pdf
        The final MVP Project underway is Cardinal-Hickory Creek and it
    will run from Dubuque, Iowa to Madison, Wisconsin. It will enable 42
    generators in the upper Midwest to deliver 7,566 MW of low-cost,
    reliable wind and solar power in the region. During construction and
    installation, which will be done by union labor, the project will
    generate approximately 2,500 jobs and $274 million in economic impacts
    (GDP), according to the NREL's modeling. During operation, it will
    result in 135 permanent jobs and $17 million in annual economic impact.
        As customer demand for low-cost clean energy increases,
    transmission lines like the Cardinal-Hickory Creek project will meet
    the need by providing consumers with access to electricity generated in
    renewable energy-rich areas of Iowa and Minnesota. With the right
    policies in place, this model of transmission development can be
    repeated in the Midwest and across the country.

    Investments are Needed to Ensure Resilience and Grid Security

        Reliability is always going to be an important issue for our nation
    as electricity is a key driver for our growth, prosperity, safety and
    security. This importance will only grow as electrification of the
    economy proceeds apace.
        The threats faced by the system are both natural and man-made. The
    array and capabilities of hostile forces seeking to attack the U.S.
    electric grid and destabilize the nation have increased in size and
    sophistication over the past decade.
        To date, ITC has invested approximately $9.8 billion in our 16,000
    miles of transmission lines and about 670 substations to date.
    Significant ongoing, long-term investment is still needed in grid
    security to harden our systems against man-made and natural threats and
    address aging infrastructure, reliability needs, NERC criteria, and
    other infrastructure considerations.
        Grid resilience means increasing our ability to anticipate,
    withstand, recover and adapt to a wide variety of dynamic and material
    risks to our electric systems.
        ITC's systems serve Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri,
    Kansas and Oklahoma, with a combined peak load exceeding 26,000
    megawatts (MW). These areas frequently experience blizzards,
    windstorms, flooding and other natural disasters. ITC has observed an
    increase in the frequency and severity of these and other extreme
    weather events, as well as their potential to disrupt the reliable
    delivery of energy to customers.
        The widespread power outages caused by last summer's devastating
    derecho in Iowa--estimated by NOAA to cost more than $11 billion in
    damages--and the recent extended sub-freezing temperatures across much
    of the U.S., demonstrate the importance of a resilient and reliable
    electric power grid. Extreme weather events of an intensity comparable
    to the Midwest derecho in August 2020 can no longer be considered
    ``black swan'' or one-in-a-hundred-year events.
        Consequently, continued investments in transmission are essential
    to ensure older transmission lines are rebuilt to provide greater
    system resiliency and reliability during extreme weather events. At
    ITC, we are hardening our systems to provide greater redundancy to the
    entire grid, and keep power flowing to consumers during storms.

    Investments are Needed to Realize Electrification

        Automakers, states and corporate players have declared ambitious
    transportation electrification commitments--all with a focus on the
    decarbonization of transportation. For example, General Motors
    announced on January 28, 2021, that it plans to phase out gas and
    electric vehicles and offer an all-electric lineup by 2035.
        A study for WIRES conducted by the Brattle Group indicates the
    investment in transmission in the U.S. must rise from $15 billion
    annually today to as much as $40 billion per year between 2031 and 2050
    to meet this electrification challenge.\4\ Other studies (Princeton,
    E3, NREL) have indicated that the transmission system will need to
    double or even triple in size if we are to electrify the economy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ The Coming Electrification of the North American Economy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://wiresgroup.com/the-coming-electrification-of-the-north-
    american-economy/

    Federal Policy and Transmission Investment

        High-voltage transmission is essential both to meeting President
    Biden's goal of decarbonizing the U.S. electricity sector by 2035 and
    to reducing costs. A recent study from the University of California,
    Berkeley and GridLab indicates that achieving a 90% clean-powered grid
    by 2035 could deliver wholesale electricity costs 13% lower than today,
    boosted by about $100 billion in transmission expansion investment.
        Currently, many transmission projects are hampered by severely
    backlogged interconnection queues, outdated planning processes, and
    cost allocation debates that remain polarized. Lead times for large-
    scale transmission projects spanning up to a decade or more are
    unacceptable. Policymakers and stakeholders must act swiftly to address
    the regulatory and policy bottlenecks that threaten America's path to a
    cleaner energy future.
        What is needed to meet the challenge? In short, we must address the
    three major policy hurdles to transmission development--planning, cost
    allocation, and permitting. First, as mentioned above, we need to plan
    the system in a way that anticipates future needs and unlocks our
    nation's abundant renewable resource potential. Second, we need to put
    in place cost allocation policies that equitably spread costs to
    beneficiaries of major projects, rather than placing all these costs on
    each incremental generator. Finally, we must ensure that permitting and
    siting processes are efficient and timely without undermining important
    environmental protections.
        As part of this framework for policy reform, President Biden's
    proposal for an Investment Tax Credit for transmission offers a
    valuable tool to help lower costs for large projects and make it easier
    to achieve cost allocation agreements, which is a key hurdle to project
    approval and construction.

    Regulatory Improvements Are Also Essential

        While Congress has many tools to address the policy roadblocks
    mentioned above, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will
    continue to play a central role in moving towards a proactive and
    broadly beneficial grid planning approach.
        To create a policy environment for proactive investments in
    transmission, FERC should:

          Improve planning processes by requiring regions to
    recognize and ``count'' all the benefits of a given transmission
    project;
          Require planning scenarios to include state and corporate
    clean energy goals and realistic estimates for electrification growth;
          Develop new cost allocation policies to equitably and
    expeditiously integrate the significant amount of renewable energy
    projects waiting to be connected to the grid;
          Reform policies that make transmission development slower
    and more complex, especially those processes imposed under the rubric
    of ``competition'';

    Conclusion

        ITC supports the bipartisan goal of investing in the nation's
    transmission grid. We stand ready to work with Congress, FERC and
    others to ensure that we can seize this opportunity to improve the
    nation's transmission system, encourage and realize the blessings of
    abundant, affordable clean energy, as well as increase the resilience
    of our energy system. By doing so, we can chart a pathway to a low-
    carbon energy system with benefits that are broadly shared across the
    economy. If we fail to act with urgency, the grid could become a
    significant roadblock to climate progress.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before the
    Committee. I look forward to working with Congress and the
    Administration to invest in America's clean energy future.

        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Ms. Apsey.
        Next, Mr. Colston, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF DONNIE COLSTON

        Mr. Colston. Thank you, Chair Castor, Ranking Member
    Graves, and the members of the Select Committee. My name is
    Donnie Colston. I am the Director of the International
    Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Utility Department. On behalf
    of our President, Lonnie Stephenson, thank you for inviting me
    to testify on this importance of modernizing and expanding the
    electric grid.
        The IBEW is the largest energy union in the United States,
    with 775,000 active members and with roughly 400,000 workers
    employed in generation, transmission, distribution, and
    construction.
        It is said the North American electrical grid is the
    largest machine ever built by human hands. The interconnecting
    web of power plants, end users, and everything in between fuels
    the $22 trillion U.S. economy. However, our current electric
    distribution system, which was primarily built in the 1960s and
    1970s, and functions on a regional or localized basis, needs
    significant replacements and upgrades now and in the coming
    years to maintain an enhanced system performance to deliver
    new, cleaner sources of power generation from its source to
    customers. The need to modernize and expand the electric grid
    has become even more pressing due to climate change and the
    need to reduce greenhouse emissions.
        Any effort to markedly increase clean and renewable
    generation onto the electric grid will require a significant
    increase in the development of new transmission lines. At the
    IBEW, we see the need to modernize and expand the electric grid
    as a major work opportunity for our members. Reports released
    this year by Americans for a Clean Energy Grid and American
    Council on Renewable Energy found that building out electric
    transmission to deliver new renewable and clean generation and
    increase grid reliability would create between 240,000 to
    600,000 direct jobs. The IBEW firmly believes our linemen are
    the best trained and most experienced workers to fill this
    anticipated need.
        To provide one example, the IBEW is working with Avangrid
    to build the New England Clean Energy Connect. The NECEC is a
    $950 million investment that will deliver 1,200 megawatts of
    renewable hydropower from Canada to the New England energy
    grid. Once built, the project will employ around 600 IBEW
    members and create an additional 800 indirect jobs during the
    construction phase.
        As a strong supporter of expanding and modernizing the
    electric grid, the IBEW supports policies that will enhance
    grid reliability and bring cleaner power generation to
    consumers and provide steady work for our members.
        Siting and permitting are two of the biggest barriers to
    transmission construction. IBEW in general is supportive of
    policy changes that will improve the permitting process and
    ensure project applications are finalized in a reasonable,
    expeditious manner.
        IBEW members are interested in blue-collar quality jobs,
    jobs that provide family-supporting wages with good benefits.
    The IBEW supports policies that would ensure federally funded
    construction and infrastructure projects meet the highest labor
    standards, policies that include Davis-Bacon Act and prevailing
    wage requirements and Buy American standards for key materials
    and products.
        Additionally, these labor standards need to extend to all
    forms of Federal support, including tax credits, such as the
    investment tax credit or the production tax credit. The IBEW
    would also include tax credits to be paired, as called for in
    the American Jobs Plan, with a fair choice to join a union and
    bargain collectively.
        With the Federal Government taking the decisionmaking lead,
    market predictability will improve, as will the IBEW's ability
    to plan for training the next generation of construction
    linemen. It takes 3 years to train a journeyman lineman to
    perform transmission line construction and maintenance, and we
    anticipate the need for at least 50,000 new power linemen over
    the next 10 years. While projects are held up, we are losing
    valuable training time.
        The IBEW asks for the Select Committee's leadership on
    modernizing and expanding the electric grid, bringing new clean
    energy generation to consumers, ensuring grid reliability are
    goals of all Americans that can and should support. We remain a
    ready partner with our employers and elected officials from
    both sides of the aisle.
        Thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's
    hearing. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
        [The statement of Mr. Colston follows:]

                      Opening Statement of Donnie Colston
                          Director, Utility Department

                International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

               Before the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                         U.S. House of Representatives

                                  May 20, 2021

        Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and the members of the Select
    Committee, my name is Donnie Colston. I am the Director of the
    International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Utility
    Department. On behalf of our president, Lonnie Stephenson, thank you
    for inviting me to testify on the importance of modernizing and
    expanding the electric grid.
        The IBEW is the largest energy union in the United States, with
    775,000 active members and with roughly 400,000 workers employed in
    generation, transmission, distribution, and construction all in some
    way related to the electrical grid.
        It is said that the North American electrical grid is the largest
    machine ever built by human hands. The interconnecting web of power
    plants, end users and everything in between fuels the $22 trillion U.S.
    economy. However, our current electric distribution system, which was
    primarily built in the 1960's and 70's and functions on a regional or
    localized basis, needs significant replacements and upgrades now and in
    the coming years to maintain and enhance system performance and deliver
    new, cleaner sources of power generation from its source to customers.
    The need to modernize and expand the electric grid has become even more
    pressing due to climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas
    emissions. Any effort to markedly increase clean and renewable
    generation onto the electric grid will require a significant increase
    in the development of new transmission lines.
        At the IBEW, we see the need to modernize and expand the electric
    grid as a major work opportunity for our members. A recent report by
    the Americans for a Clean Energy Grid found that construction of 22
    identified transmission projects would create 240,000 direct jobs.\1\ A
    separate report by the American Council on Renewable Energy stated that
    an investment tax credit for regionally significant transmission lines
    would create 600,000 transmission jobs and at least 330,000
    transmission jobs for ``projects weighted by odds of success.'' \2\
    These jobs projections, if true, would be a boon for our members and
    the communities that host these critical infrastructure investments.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Michael Goggin, Rob Gramlich, and Michael Skelly,
    ``Transmission Projects Ready to Go: Plugging into America's Untapped
    Renewable Resources,'' (April 2021), https://
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    cleanenergygrid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Transmission-Projects-
    Ready-to-Go-Final.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Michael Goggin and Rob Gramlich, ``Investment Tax Credit for
    Regionally Significant Electricity Transmission Lines,'' (May 2021),
    https://acore.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Investment-Tax-Credit-for-
    Regionally-Significant-Electricity-Transmission-Lines-ACORE.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To provide one example, IBEW is working with Avangrid to build the
    New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC). The NECEC is a $950 million
    investment that will deliver 1,200 megawatts of renewable hydropower
    from Canada to the New England energy grid. Once built, the NECEC would
    be New England's largest source of renewable energy and help lower
    energy costs for consumers. The project will employ around 600 IBEW
    members and create an additional 800 indirect jobs during the
    construction phase. It is estimated that $440 million in worker
    compensation will be provided during construction, a significant
    injection of money for rural communities. The project will also provide
    notable benefits to Maine residents, including an $18 million annual
    increase in host community property tax revenues, $140 million in
    consumer rate relief and $15 million for fiber optic and broadband
    expansion for western Maine.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ New England Clean Energy Project,
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://www.necleanenergyconnect.org/project-benefits/#developBENEFITS.
        A second transmission project IBEW members are ready to build is
    the Cardinal-Hickory Creek Transmission Line Project that is being
    developed by American Transmission Company, ITC Midwest and Dairyland
    Power Cooperative. The project is one of 17 high-voltage transmission
    lines that the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) approved
    to improve the reliability and flexibility of the regional electric
    grid. The 102-mile, 345-kilovolt line would connect renewable wind
    generation in Iowa to consumers in Wisconsin and throughout the
    Midwest. This project will employ over 100 IBEW members in northeast
    Iowa and southern Wisconsin and, like the NECEC, is an important
    investment in rural America.
        As a strong supporter of expanding and modernizing the electric
    grid, the IBEW supports several policy proposals we believe will
    enhance grid reliability, bring cleaner power generation to consumers,
    and provide steady work for our members. The IBEW supports many of the
    proposals laid out in President Biden's American Jobs Plan. In
    particular, our union supports the administration's call for a $100
    billion investment in the nation's power infrastructure. This includes
    the creation of an investment tax credit (ITC) for regionally
    significant electrical transmission projects. As noted earlier, a
    transmission ITC could be a important tool to incentivize the buildout
    of power lines that would provide significant employment opportunities
    for our members. However, we would call on policymakers to ensure that
    a transmission ITC is broadly available and aimed at getting
    transmission lines built.
        The American Jobs Plan also calls for the creation of a new Grid
    Deployment Authority that would allow for ``better leverage of existing
    rights-of-way--along roads and railways--and supports creative
    financing tools to spur additional high priority, high-voltage
    transmission lines.'' \4\ Our union is supportive of the
    administration's efforts to become more engaged in facilitating
    transmission construction and use the federal government's authority to
    cut through existing roadblocks to build power lines of regional and
    national significance. Relatedly, the IBEW supports the Department of
    Energy's recent announcement of two financing tools intended to
    facilitate transmission line construction. These are the Western Area
    Power Administration Transmission Infrastructure Program's $3.25
    billion fund for transmission projects and making $5 billion available
    for transmission projects through the Energy Department's Loan Programs
    Office. We hope these two new funding opportunities will help overcome
    one of the biggest hurdles to power line construction: cost allocation.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ The American Jobs Plan, https://
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/31/fact-
    sheet-the-american-jobs-plan.
        Our union supports the use of existing rights-of-way to facilitate
    the siting of transmission lines. Our members are familiar with the
    difficulties surrounding the siting of power line and are generally
    supportive of policies that will help overcome barriers to grid
    modernization and expansion. However, transmission construction should
    not be unduly impeded if an existing right-of-way is not available for
    a proposed transmission project.
        Siting and permitting are two of the biggest barriers to
    transmission construction. The IBEW, in general, is supportive of
    policy changes that will improve the permitting process and ensure
    project applications are finalized in a reasonably expeditious manner.
    There are recommendations from the Majority Staff's 2020 Report in this
    area that would help facilitate the siting and permitting process.
    These include the recommendation that Congress should amend the Federal
    Power Act to clarify that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
    (FERC) may exercise backstop siting authority for an interstate
    electric transmission line. We are also supportive of the proposal to
    authorize federal funding for the Department of Energy to provide
    technical assistance for state, local and tribal authorities to conduct
    transmission planning and review applications of proposed transmission
    projects.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, ``Solving the
    Climate Crisis,'' (June 2020),
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://climatecrisis.house.gov/sites/climatecrisis.house.gov/files/
    Climate%20Crisis%20Action%20Plan.pdf.
        The IBEW is not just interested in job numbers--our members are
    interested in job quality. Many of our members join the IBEW due to our
    union's longstanding record of securing family-supporting wages with
    good benefits and a strong working relationship with our employers. For
    these reasons, the IBEW supports the Select Committee's 2020 Majority
    Staff Report recommendation to ``ensure federally funded construction
    and infrastructure projects meet the highest labor standards.'' \6\ We
    agree wholeheartedly with the Majority Staff Report that federal
    spending should include standards such as extending Davis-Bacon Act
    prevailing wage requirements and Buy America standards for key
    materials and products. Additionally, these labor standards need to
    extend to all forms of federal support, including tax credits such as
    the ITC and production tax credit (PTC). The IBEW would also include
    that tax credits be paired, as called for in the American Jobs Plan,
    with a ``fair choice to join a union and bargain collectively.'' \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Ibid.
        \7\ The American Jobs Plan, https://
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/31/fact-
    sheet-the-american-jobs-plan.
        With the federal government taking the decision-making lead, market
    predictability will improve, as will the IBEW's ability to plan for
    training the next generation of construction linemen. It takes three
    years to train a journeyman lineman to perform transmission line
    construction and maintenance, and we anticipate the need for at least
    50,000 new power linemen over the next 10 years. While projects are
    held up, we are losing valuable training time.
        The IBEW asks for the Select Committee's leadership on modernizing
    and expanding the electric grid. Bringing new, clean generation to
    consumers and ensuring grid reliability are goals that all Americans
    can and should support. We remain a ready partner with our employers
    and elected officials from both sides of the aisle. Thank you for the
    opportunity to participate in today's roundtable. I am happy to answer
    any questions you may have.

        Ms. Castor. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Fisher, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your
    testimony.

                   STATEMENT OF EMILY SANFORD FISHER

        Ms. Fisher. Good morning, Chair Castor, Ranking Member
    Graves, and members of the Select Committee. My name is Emily
    Fisher, and I am here today on behalf of the Edison Electric
    Institute. Thank you for the opportunity to speak about
    modernizing and expanding the energy grid. I am honored to be
    here with my fellow witnesses.
        EEI is the association that represents all U.S. investor-
    owned electric companies. Our members provide electricity for
    more than 220 Americans and operate in all 50 States and the
    District of Columbia. Collectively, the electric power industry
    supports more than 7 million jobs in communities across the
    country. Our members deliver the safe, reliable, affordable,
    and clean energy that powers our economy and enhances the lives
    of all Americans.
        EEI member companies are leading a clean energy
    transformation. Carbon emissions from the U.S. electric power
    sector are at their lowest level in more than 40 years, and we
    are 40 percent below 2005 levels as of year end 2020. At the
    same time, 40 percent of the electricity that serves customers
    now comes from clean, carbon-free resources, including nuclear
    energy, hydropower, wind, and solar energy.
        Our members are united in their commitment to get the
    energy they provide as clean as they can, as fast as they can,
    without compromising the reliability and affordability that our
    customers value. To this end, EEI's members will continue to
    reduce their emissions in future years with more than two dozen
    members committing to reach zero or net-zero carbon emissions
    by 2050 or faster. This cleaner electricity will play a key
    role in reducing emissions economywide, particularly in the
    transportation, industrial, and building sectors through
    increased electrification.
        Electric transmission infrastructure is the backbone of the
    nation's energy grid and will be critical in facilitating the
    continued transition to clean energy. Our industry is the
    nation's most capital intensive, and since 2010, EEI's members
    have invested more than $1 trillion to build smarter energy
    infrastructure and to integrate more clean energy into the grid
    affordably, reducing both emissions and costs.
        The transmission system also helps optimize the energy
    grid's performance, reducing congestion, enabling the
    deployment of new technologies, and enhancing reliability and
    resiliency.
        The benefits of transmission are not in dispute, and there
    is broad agreement that more transmission investment is needed
    and is needed relatively quickly to meet clean energy
    reliability and resilience goals. Despite this broad agreement
    that we need more transmission, the pace of transmission
    development is slow. Transmission projects typically take 7 to
    10 years to plan, site, permit, construct, and energize. Yet we
    have many examples of projects that have taken more than a
    decade from conception to completion and just as many examples
    of those proposed projects that were abandoned because progress
    was too slow and too costly.
        Litigation can be a significant factor in these delays, and
    groups that support clean energy often oppose the
    infrastructure necessary to integrate more of it.
        Our member companies and our labor partners can help build
    the transmission needed to meet and accelerate the achievement
    of clean energy goals. Unfortunately, the way the nation plans,
    permits, and pays for transmission are significant obstacles to
    building the infrastructure we need quickly. Making changes
    that align these processes with long-term clean energy goals
    will not be easy, but it is essential. I offer some high-level
    observations about what we may be able to do to deploy
    transmission more quickly.
        With respect to planning, current regional planning
    processes are hindering, not helping, stakeholders identify
    necessary projects and get them built. Existing planning
    frameworks are too narrow in terms of scope and scale. Planning
    should be oriented toward public policy goals and priorities
    and should be able to take into consideration future
    electrification scenarios.
        Projects can and should serve multiple goals, from clean
    energy integration and improved reliability, to increased cost
    efficiency and increased resilience. It is also essential that
    frameworks focus on getting all stakeholders, including states
    and state economic regulators, on the same page with respect to
    goals and benefits as early as possible to ensure that proposed
    projects can move forward quickly once identified, both with
    respect to permitting and cost allocation.
        With respect to permitting, in order to build large-scale
    transmission, a host of state and Federal approvals are needed.
    For example, critical clean energy infrastructure frequently
    requires Federal permits that trigger environmental reviews
    under the National Environmental Policy Act. These can take a
    really long time to complete and can be the focus of even more
    protracted litigation. EEI supports a NEPA process that is
    clear, transparent, and as efficient as possible, while meeting
    all environmental requirements.
        Perhaps one of the most contentious issues is how to pay
    for necessary new transmission infrastructure. Current
    processes focus on assigning costs to those customers who
    benefit immediately and directly from the investment. This does
    not take into consideration the broader benefits of
    transmission for all customers.
        To remove a critical obstacle to increased investment, it
    may be necessary to broaden the scope of benefits and
    beneficiaries considered, particularly as the transmission
    system, the generation resource mix, and policy goals change
    and are expected to change over time. As noted, getting all
    stakeholders on the same page with respect to the need for and
    the benefits of proposed transmission will be essential.
        There are other ways to address the cost of transmission.
    Grants and other cost-sharing mechanisms to help pay for
    measures that will harden the energy grid and make it more
    resilient in the face of wildfires, hurricanes, and other
    natural disasters can help reduce cost pressures on customers,
    particularly when many of our customers are still recovering
    from the economic impacts of the pandemic.
        Increased transmission investment is essential to meeting
    our nation's and our industry's clean energy goals. Our members
    are committed to investing in the energy grid and continuing to
    make it smarter, cleaner, stronger, more dynamic, and more
    secure. We look forward to working with this committee and
    Congress to help achieve these goals.
        Thank you again for this opportunity, and I look forward to
    any questions you may have.
        [The statement of Ms. Fisher follows:]

                       Statement by Emily Sanford Fisher

                    General Counsel, Corporate Secretary &
                      Senior Vice President, Clean Energy

                           Edison Electric Institute

                                   Before the

                  House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                                  May 20, 2021

        Good morning Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and members of
    the Select Committee. My name is Emily Fisher, and I am here today on
    behalf of the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). Thank you for the
    opportunity to speak about modernizing and expanding the energy grid. I
    am honored to be here with Linda Apsey, President and Chief Executive
    Office of EEI member company, ITC Holdings, and with a representative
    of our labor partners, Donnie Colston from the International
    Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
        EEI is the association that represents all U.S. investor-owned
    electric companies. Our members provide electricity for more than 220
    million Americans and operate in all 50 states and the District of
    Columbia. Collectively, the electric power industry supports more than
    7 million jobs in communities across the country. EEI's member
    companies deliver the safe, reliable, affordable, and clean energy that
    powers our economy and enhances the lives of all Americans.
        EEI's member companies are leading a clean energy transformation.
    Thanks largely to the efforts of EEI's members, carbon emissions from
    the U.S. electric power sector are at their lowest level in more than
    40 years and were 40 percent below 2005 levels as of year-end 2020. At
    the same time, 40 percent of the electricity that serves customers now
    comes from clean, carbon-free resources, including nuclear energy,
    hydropower, wind, and solar energy.
        Along with significant reductions in carbon emissions and increases
    in clean energy, America's electric companies have made equally
    significant reductions in emissions of more localized air pollution,
    which improves the health and well-being of the communities that our
    member companies serve. Since 1990, our industry has cut sulfur dioxide
    emissions by 95 percent and nitrogen oxides emissions by 88 percent. As
    a result of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and other Clean Air
    Act regulations, from 2010 to 2017, the power sector has reduced
    mercury emissions by 86 percent and total emissions of hazardous air
    pollutants by 96 percent. Nationally, total power sector mercury
    emissions have been reduced by 95 percent over the period 1990 to 2020.
        These trends in emissions reductions and the deployment of clean
    energy will continue. EEI's member companies are united in their
    commitment to get the energy they provide as clean as they can as fast
    as they can, without compromising the reliability and affordability
    that our customers value. To this end, EEI's members will continue to
    reduce their emissions in future years, with more than two dozen
    members committing to reach zero or net-zero carbon emissions by 2050
    or earlier.
        A wide range of factors are driving the clean energy
    transformation, including declining costs for natural gas and renewable
    energy resources, technological improvements, changing customer
    expectations, federal and state regulations and policies, and the
    increasing use of distributed energy resources. As a result, the mix of
    resources used to generate electricity in the United States has changed
    dramatically over the last decade. This cleaner electricity will play a
    key role in reducing emissions economy-wide--particularly in the
    transportation, industrial, and building sectors--through increased
    electrification.

    Transmission and the Clean Energy Transformation

        Electric transmission infrastructure is the backbone of the
    nation's energy grid and will be critical in facilitating the continued
    transition to clean energy. Our industry is the nation's most capital-
    intensive industry, and, since 2010, EEI's member companies have
    invested more than $1 trillion to build smarter energy infrastructure
    and to integrate more clean energy into the energy grid affordably,
    reducing both emissions and costs. These significant investments ensure
    that customers receive the electricity they need, when they need it,
    safely and reliably. The transmission system also helps optimize the
    energy grid's performance, reducing congestion, enabling the deployment
    of new technologies, and enhancing reliability and resiliency.
        In addition, transmission investments create jobs and provide a
    range of other benefits. They offer communities access to lower-cost,
    cleaner sources of electricity that often are located far from densely
    populated urban centers.\1\ They support the economic viability of
    clean energy projects by reducing costly curtailments of service due to
    congested pathways and overproduction, which allows more clean energy
    to reach more end-use customers.\2\ Electric transmission investments
    also are essential to enabling greater transportation
    electrification.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See, e.g., American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), Macro
    Grid Initiative, https://acore.org/macro-grid-initiative/
    #1601561682191-976f8114-ec26.
        \2\ See World Economic Forum, Why Transmission and Distribution Are
    the Clean Energy Transition's Secret Weapons (Jul. 16, 2020), https://
    www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/transmission-distribution-clean-energy-
    transition/.
        \3\ See Weiss et al., The Coming Electrification of the North
    American Economy--Why We Need A Robust Transmission Grid, prepared for
    WIRES (Mar. 6, 2019), https://wiresgroup.com/the-coming-
    electrification-of-the-north-american-economy/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The benefits of transmission are not in dispute, and there is broad
    agreement that more transmission investment is needed and is needed
    relatively quickly when thinking about the timeline for building
    critical infrastructure.
        According to a study by Princeton University, to achieve a zero-
    carbon future by 2050, the existing high-voltage transmission capacity
    will need to expand by approximately 60 percent by 2030 and triple
    compared to 2020 capacity through 2050 to connect more wind and solar
    energy resources. Total capital investment in transmission will need to
    reach $360 billion through 2030 and $2.4 trillion by 2050.\4\ The
    Brattle Group, meanwhile, estimates that, to meet ambitious clean
    energy goals and low-carbon solutions around the country, $300 to $700
    in transmission investment is needed per each kilowatt (kW) of large-
    scale renewable energy capacity added to the system.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ See E. Larson, C. Greig, J. Jenkins, E. Mayfield, A. Pascale,
    C. Zhang, J. Drossman, R. Williams, S. Pacala, R. Socolow, EJ Baik, R.
    Birdsey, R. Duke, R. Jones, B. Haley, E. Leslie, K. Paustian, and A.
    Swan, Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure, and
    Impacts, interim report, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, p. 106
    (Dec. 15, 2020).
        \5\ See Weiss et al., n. 1, supra.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Obstacles to Needed Transmission Investments

        Despite this broad agreement that we need more transmission this
    decade to meet clean energy, reliability, and resilience goals, the
    pace of transmission development is slow. Transmission projects
    typically take 7 to 10 years to plan, site, permit, construct, and
    energize--yet we have many examples of projects that have taken more
    than a decade from conception to completion, and just as many examples
    of proposed transmission projects that were abandoned because progress
    was too slow and too costly. Litigation can be a significant factor in
    these delays, too, and groups that support clean energy often oppose
    the infrastructure necessary to integrate more of it.
        EEI's member companies and our labor partners can help build the
    transmission needed to meet and accelerate the achievement of clean
    energy goals. Unfortunately, the way the nation plans, permits, and
    pays for transmission are significant obstacles to building the
    infrastructure we need quickly. Making changes that align these
    processes with long-term clean energy goals will not be easy but is
    essential. Local communities, states, Tribes, and the federal
    government all have a role, and many stakeholders' views and
    perspectives must be considered. Today, I offer some high-level
    observations about what the federal government may be able to do to
    help deploy more transmission more quickly.

    Planning

        Current regional planning processes are hindering, not helping,
    stakeholders identify necessary projects and get them built. Existing
    planning frameworks are too narrow in terms of scope and scale.
    Planning should be oriented toward policy goals and priorities.
    Planning also should be able to take into consideration longer-term
    clean energy goals at the state and federal levels, as well as future
    electrification scenarios, and should take a broader approach to costs
    and benefits. Transmission projects can and should serve multiple
    goals, from clean energy integration and improved reliability to
    increased cost-efficiency and increased resilience.
        It also is essential that planning frameworks focus on getting all
    stakeholders, including states and state economic regulators, on the
    same page with respect to goals and benefits as early as possible in
    the process to ensure that proposed projects can move forward quickly
    once identified, both with respect to permitting and cost allocation.
    This will be especially important in the context of inter-regional
    planning.
        In general, planning frameworks should take a more holistic
    approach to assessing the need for, and benefits of, transmission. They
    also should be flexible enough to take into consideration regionally
    important issues, such as wildfire mitigation or offshore wind
    interconnection. While the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
    has indicated that it intends to revisit planning frameworks and
    requirements, congressional direction may be essential in reorienting
    the planning process in a timely way.
        In addition, the Department of Energy, in coordination with the
    National Labs, could be directed to provide some assistance by
    conducting a nationwide analysis to identify the areas with the most
    potential and need for transmission projects to address clean energy
    and system resilience needs.

    Permitting

        In order to build large-scale transmission, a host of state and
    federal approvals are needed to site and permit projects. The federal
    government can take several steps to reduce the time it takes to
    receive these permits, consistent with environmental obligations and
    requirements.
        For example, critical clean energy infrastructure projects
    frequently require federal permits that trigger environmental reviews
    under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which can take
    years to complete and increasingly have become the focus of even more
    protracted litigation. This significantly adds to the time and costs of
    critical transmission projects necessary to meet these clean energy
    objectives. EEI supports a NEPA process that is clear, transparent, and
    as efficient as possible while meeting all environmental requirements.
        To that end, there are four process revisions that can contribute
    to an efficient, environmentally sound, and defensible NEPA review:

        1.  Tiering: Utilizing ``tiering''--considering existing studies
    and environmental analyses in the NEPA process--allows federal agencies
    to build upon these previously conducted environmental studies, as well
    as decisions made during earlier state or local public reviews, instead
    of starting from scratch.
        2.  Categorical Exclusions (CE): Agencies may now apply a CE
    established under another agency's NEPA procedures, if the action
    covered by that CE and the adopting agency's proposed action are
    substantially the same. This sensible step reduces duplication and
    should be allowed to continue.
        3.  Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Analysis: GHG emissions are
    relevant to NEPA analyses, and considering such emissions is
    appropriate in the context of environmental reviews designed to ensure
    well-informed decision-making. Agencies should consider existing
    emissions estimates when relevant, including sector-wide estimates,
    when assessing GHG emissions impacts. For example, transmission
    projects that displace emissions by enabling more clean energy
    integration should be recognized as such, even if that requires a
    broader assessment of emissions impacts.
        4.  Applicant Engagement in the NEPA Process: Allowing permit
    applicants and their contractors to participate in the preparation of
    documents for environmental reviews promotes efficiency by utilizing
    those in the best position to provide critical information about
    proposed projects to regulators. Applicants and contractors have ready-
    made information regarding project alternatives and potential effects,
    and they possess significant environmental and technical resources and
    engineering information that could enable more efficient and timely
    preparation and evaluation of environmental reviews.

        Another option to help expedite siting and permitting for some
    transmission projects includes incentives to use existing rights-of-
    way, including those for transportation.
        Transmission permitting and siting is complex. These suggestions
    would not solve all delays if implemented, but they could help expedite
    the process.

    Paying

        Perhaps one of the most contentious issues is how to pay for
    necessary new transmission infrastructure. Current processes focus on
    assigning costs to those customers who benefit from the investment, but
    some states that serve as conduits for new transmission often are
    concerned about whether they will see benefits from these projects.
    This process does not take into consider the broader benefits of
    transmissions for all customers.
        To remove a critical obstacle to increased investment, it may be
    necessary to broaden the scope of benefits and beneficiaries
    considered, particularly as the transmission system, the generating
    resource mix, and policy goals change and are expected to change over
    time. As noted, getting all stakeholders on the same page with respect
    to the need for--and benefits of--proposed transmission projects during
    the planning phase will be critical in determining how to allocate
    costs fairly.
        There are other ways to address the costs of transmission. Grants
    to help pay for measures that will harden the energy grid and make it
    more resilient in the face of wildfires, hurricanes, and other natural
    disasters can help to reduce cost pressures on customers, particularly
    when many customers are still recovering from the economic impacts of
    the COVID-19 pandemic.
        EEI's member companies take their commitment to providing reliable
    and resilient electricity seriously and are investing billions to
    harden the grid--they are installing concrete poles, moving substations
    to higher ground, putting technology on the grid that can sense fire
    and shut off a power line, and more. Federal dollars could help
    accelerate these adaptation investments. In addition, some federal
    funds can support ongoing efforts to modernize the energy grid to use
    the latest technologies and to improve two-way communication on the
    system with everything from smart meters to appliances to private solar
    and storage systems.

    Conclusion

        Increased transmission investment is essential to meeting our
    nation's and our industry's clean energy goals. A robust transmission
    system also enables electric companies to deliver energy where it is
    needed, to integrate more clean energy into the energy grid, to enhance
    the reliability and resiliency of the grid, and to lower the cost of
    delivering energy by reducing congestion. EEI's member companies are
    committed to investing in the energy grid and to continuing to make it
    smarter, cleaner, stronger, more dynamic, and more secure. We look
    forward to working with this Committee and Congress to help achieve
    these goals.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to
    any questions you may have.

        Ms. Castor. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Skelly, you are recognized for 5 minutes. Welcome.

                      STATEMENT OF MICHAEL SKELLY

        Mr. Skelly. Thank you.
        My name is Michael Skelly, and I am the founder and CEO of
    Grid United, and we are an early-stage transmission development
    company based right here in Houston, Texas, which, as many of
    you know, is emerging as a leader in energy transition. And I
    have been involved over the last 25 years in many wind
    generation and solar generation projects, as well as lots of
    transmission lines, including some that, as Ms. Fisher pointed
    out, are now in construction and others that got killed off
    because of too many delays and too many obstacles to get them
    done.
        I thought I would focus a little bit on what has happened
    in the last 10 years and the opportunity set that is before us.
        And the first thing I would like to talk about is the
    exciting companies that have emerged over the last decade that
    use situational awareness diagnostics and ultrafast processing
    power to get better use out of the existing grid. And these
    technologies commonly known as grid enhancing technologies have
    emerged. A number of companies have emerged based here in the
    U.S. that will help us get better--basically, move more power
    through the existing grid, and that is something that we can do
    and that Congress can act on in the near future using existing
    authorities. So I would encourage you all to focus on that.
        Next up, I co-authored the study that a number of folks
    have referred to that identified 22 shovel-ready, high-voltage
    transmission projects around the country being developed by
    folks like ITC, Ms. Fisher's member companies, and a number of
    independent developers of transmission lines. And over the last
    decade, these companies have slogged through the processes
    that, as we all know, take a very, very long time, and they are
    ready to go. And the criteria that we use to identify these
    projects was, okay, what can we get underway in the next 24 to
    36 months? And I am happy to talk in detail about any of those
    projects or the processes they are going through.
        But what we need is some successes, and as we all know,
    success begets success in many walks of life, including
    infrastructure development. And this opportunity set that is
    before us now, with a little bit of a push from things like the
    investment tax credit, we can get these projects done. They
    will unlock tens of thousands of megawatts of new generation
    projects, put lots of IBEW members to work, and boost today's
    level of renewable energy penetration to even higher levels,
    and help address some of the reliability issues that we have
    become painfully aware of, particularly in places like here in
    Texas.
        And while the--the other point that I would like to sort of
    highlight again is that the--Ms. Apsey pointed out some of the
    problems with the current transmission planning process. I
    won't reiterate those, but suffice it to say that we need
    planning processes that take into account all of the benefits
    that we get from transmission, and we need to think in a much
    broader fashion about the public policy goals that the
    transmission investments can help us achieve.
        We have largely solved the problem over the last 30 years
    with continued investments in R&D and scaled up deployment of
    renewables, and we now know how to produce wind power and solar
    power incredibly inexpensively. We have solved that challenge.
    The big challenge ahead of us now is building the grid so that
    everybody in the country can get access to those cheap
    resources. And as we build out the grid, we will do what we
    have done here in Texas when we did a big transmission expanse
    in the mid-2000s, we will help drive economic development, come
    up with a cleaner energy mix, and bring down costs to consumer.
        So thank you very much, and look forward to your questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Skelly follows:]

                          Statement by Michael Skelly

                                Founder and CEO

                                Grid United, LLC

            Before the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                                  May 20, 2021

        Good morning Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and members of
    the Select Committee, and thank you for the opportunity to testify
    before you today.
        My name is Michael Skelly and I am founder and CEO of Grid United,
    an early stage transmission development company. I have spent the last
    25 years developing a wide variety of energy projects. I got involved
    in the US wind industry in the late 90's, and helped put together
    thousands of megawatts of new wind projects. In 2009 I started a
    company called Clean Line Energy which focused on interstate power
    lines to move renewable energy around the country. We successfully
    permitted a three-state high voltage, direct current transmission line.
    We sold off our projects several years ago to other developers who are
    carrying them forward. Indeed, our Western Spirit project is now under
    construction in New Mexico.
        I live in Houston, Texas, which is fast becoming a national center
    for renewable energy development. The combination of an entrepreneurial
    ethos, abundant wind and solar in Texas' wide open spaces, an open
    access grid, and policy innovation that began with then Governor George
    Bush and continued with Governor Rick Perry's push to expand Texas'
    transmission system, has made Texas a leader in wind and solar, and we
    are now witnessing an explosion in energy storage installations.
        The recent outages of winter storm Uri are not the subject of
    today's hearing, but must be mentioned. As we all know, for four days
    in February, 4.5 million Texans became harshly aware of the grid and
    its critical importance to everything we do. Importantly, Texas' high
    voltage grid itself held up quite well and few outages were attributed
    to transmission problems, but generators, including gas, nuclear, coal
    and wind generators all had problems. No generation source covered
    itself in glory. One key lesson from the Texas experience is that the
    transmission investments initiated by Governor Perry made a bad
    situation less awful. Another key lesson is that networked systems
    perform better than isolated systems. Personally, while I believe
    Texas' electrical independence serves the state well and has enabled us
    to build more generation quickly, we would be well served by more
    asynchronous DC ties to neighboring states. Those interregional
    transmission ties would allow Texas to export its energy bounty in
    times of surplus, help our neighbors when their supplies are tight, and
    enhance our reliability by importing when we need it. All regions need
    to perform scenario planning for extreme weather, and if they do, they
    will all find significant benefit to such interregional ties. Anything
    Congress can do that simultaneously recognizes Texas' independent
    streak while facilitating connections to adjacent control areas will
    serve us all well.
        In April of this year, I co-authored a study identifying 22 shovel-
    ready high voltage transmission projects around the country that would
    begin construction in the near term if more workable transmission
    policies, like the tax credit, were enacted. These projects would
    create over 1.2 million jobs across the transmission, wind, and solar
    sectors; interconnect 60,000 MW of new renewable capacity; and increase
    America's solar and wind generation by 50% from current levels. A
    decade ago, we as a country did not have such a fantastic opportunity
    set in front of us. However, in the ensuing years, both utilities and
    independent developers have been sorting through the nettlesome siting,
    permitting, cost allocation and grid connection challenges. I am firmly
    convinced that success will beget success in transmission, and pushing
    these 22 projects over the top will invigorate efforts across the
    country--resulting in more jobs, enhanced domestic supply chains, and
    big construction jobs, especially in our hard hit rural areas.
        Aside from the economic benefits these projects embody, they also
    represent improved health outcomes for residents of population centers
    living near fossil-burning power plants. Transmission plays a role in
    replacing the carbon and other pollution in these population centers
    with renewable sources of energy, thereby improving air quality for
    residents, and addressing long-standing environmental injustices.
        Before I talk about policy mechanisms that can help us improve
    reliability and get more clean energy on the grid, I'd like to first
    address the critical importance of getting as much bang for the buck
    for the investments we have made in the existing grid. Over the last
    decade, a number of exciting companies, in some cases with public R&D
    support, have developed ``Grid Enhancing Technologies''. These
    companies harness the power of situational awareness and ultrafast
    processing of information to adjust the throughput of existing wires,
    allowing them to get more power to market more efficiently. A number of
    these technologies were not mature a decade ago, but now they are, and
    most of the promising companies in this space are based here in the
    United States.
        Forward thinking utilities like Xcel, MidAmerican and National Grid
    are deploying them already. FERC Chair Richard Glick and his
    predecessor have taken an active interest in encouraging utilities and
    system operators to adopt these technologies. Congress could play a
    critical role by appropriating funds to share in the cost of their
    deployment--an approach that will save customers money, enable more
    renewable power, and enhance reliability.
        But better use of the existing grid alone won't do the job alone.
        We have largely solved the problem of producing wind and solar
    electricity in a cost effective fashion. Now we need a better grid to
    pull it all together.
        The Investment Tax Credit for Regionally Significant Electricity
    Transmission Lines, would be an essential tool in developing American
    grid infrastructure. The proposed 30% tax credit would unlock new
    merchant transmission lines as well as rate regulated ones, ultimately
    unlocking investment and reducing costs to consumers.
        As Congress considers an investment tax credit for transmission
    lines, it's perhaps helpful to dive into the mechanics of how
    transmission lines get paid for today and why we aren't getting all the
    grid we need to combat climate change. In this context, one must look
    at the two business models that support the financing and construction
    of new transmission lines.
        The great majority of transmission projects built in the US come
    about as a result of regional grid planning exercises. System operators
    project growth in demand, make assumptions about plant retirements, and
    project what new projects might get built. Individual transmission
    lines or groups of lines are looked at on a ``benefit to cost'' ratio.
    If new lines will benefit the system, say on a 1.5 to 1.0 benefit to
    cost test, the system operators, working with state regulators, see to
    it that the lines get built. If the projects don't pass that test, they
    don't get built. The rub lies in the fact that in almost all cases in
    the US, carbon externalities are not factored into the grid planning
    process. Sometimes carbon is included in scenario planning, but rarely
    is carbon used in the benefit to cost tests. Not surprisingly, this
    means that we are not planning the grid around a carbon constrained
    world. While not a perfect policy tool, an Investment Tax Credit can
    make up for this deficiency in the planning process. The ITC would have
    the effect of lowering the denominator in the benefit to cost test.
    More lines would make it through the planning process, and we will end
    up with a lower carbon grid.
        The other type of transmission lines that get built are called
    ``merchant'' lines. These are typically built outside the conventional
    planning process, and their economics rely on generators paying the
    developers of merchant lines to deliver their power across long
    distances to get to market. An ITC will help reduce the cost of the
    transmission service, and therefore more lines would get built, and
    more renewable energy projects will follow. Importantly, merchant lines
    often provide reliability and other services to the grid for which they
    do not get paid--despite the fact that such services can be extremely
    valuable. An ITC will help make up for this market failure.
        In both the merchant and regionally planned approach, the ITC is
    passed through to consumers.
        While the tax credit is beneficial to unlocking these shovel-ready
    projects, the timeline for new interregional transmission can take a
    decade to complete. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has the
    authority to break the planning and cost allocation logjams that are
    preventing high voltage interregional projects from being built. Among
    other reforms, the Commission should consider directing regional
    planning authorities to evaluate future system needs based on a range
    of plausible scenarios, including high renewable penetration; link the
    interconnection and transmission planning processes; and consider non-
    transmission alternatives to costly local replacement projects that
    don't move the needle on bulk power flows. Research has shown
    incorporating non-transmission such as Grid Enhancing Technologies can
    yield significant returns and unlock previously untapped capacity,
    efficiency, and resilience.
        High voltage transmission lines are the ties that bind regional
    grids and build resiliency. With renewed effort, we can enhance and
    modernize grid infrastructure, create the jobs of tomorrow, improve
    health outcomes for the most vulnerable, and reduce the costs of
    running one of the world's most complicated technological wonders. We
    should take the forewarnings of recent regional grid failures as a
    national call to action to rebuild our infrastructure along an
    interregional framework with the tools, technology, and policy delivery
    mechanisms we have at our disposal today.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and am happy to answer
    any questions you may have.

        Ms. Castor. Well, thank you very much.
        I want to thank all of our witnesses for their very
    insightful testimony. And I will recognize myself for 5 minutes
    for questions.
        You know, a reliable electric grid powers everything we do.
    And I think it is clear that we have a consensus here that
    investments in transmission would benefit consumers across the
    country. We have to fix some of the flaws too that were
    highlighted by the catastrophe, fatal catastrophe, in Texas and
    others. So this piece of an infrastructure plan focused on
    electric transmission is just going to be critical, and I think
    there is common ground here.
        So, Ms. Apsey, you have now watched a growing consensus
    here in Congress. President Biden has put forth his American
    Jobs Plan. Here in the House, we are probably ahead of the
    Senate with LIFT America and CLEAN Future. When you look at the
    pieces of legislation that are on the table right now to be
    considered as we hammer out an infrastructure plan, what is
    most important, and do you see anything--any pieces that are
    missing?
        Ms. Apsey. Great. Thank you, Chair Castor, for that
    question.
        Yeah, absolutely there are, you know, I would say,
    multiple, you know, I think indications both from the
    administration, in different bills, the investment tax credits.
    You know, I think for us, and given our business and our
    experience, you know, anything that I think can help drive and
    facilitate the regional planning process--because really what
    we need is, you know, utilities make significant investments
    every day to maintain the reliability of their grid. But when
    it comes to planning, you know, across multiple transmission
    owners, across multiple states, across multiple regions, we
    don't necessarily have the processes that facilitate that. We
    have had some positive momentum about a year--about 10 years
    ago, with the Midwest Regional Transmission Organization, with
    their MVP portfolio of projects, but since that time, we really
    have not seen any other meaningful regional transmission.
        So legislation or efforts that can advance--and I think
    both Emily and Mr. Skelly spoke to this--where we can include,
    you know, the multiple benefits that transmission provides,
    transmission integrates and provides access to renewable
    energy. It also continues to provide access to existing
    generation assets. It provides resiliency. It provides
    reliability. It provides economic benefits. And all of these
    benefits have to be included as we do our studies.
        And if we can do that, what will occur is that the benefits
    will speak for themselves and that then we can move forward to
    actually realize these transmission projects, rather than them
    being stuck in sort of what we call the planning do-loop of the
    scenarios and the assumptions.
        And so there are--there are specific provisions that do
    advance regional planning, and we would strongly suggest that
    we continue to put our shoulder behind those. I think the
    investment tax credit is an important tool in our toolbox to
    continue to realize meaningful investment in regional and
    interregional transmission infrastructure.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you.
        Yeah, and I am glad you mentioned that, because I am
    working on legislation in the Energy and Commerce Committee to
    address the expansion of the transmission system, the
    preplanning, the incentives for states to do that planning.
    Secretary Granholm yesterday in a hearing highlighted existing
    rights-of-way. So we have got to get down to brass tacks now in
    those details.
        So, Ms. Fisher, I know you care about this and you are--all
    the utilities do as well. One of the key pieces to moving to
    clean energy and expanded grid is going to be a clean energy
    standard and an energy efficiency standard. States are
    different, though, across the country, and we want to make sure
    at the Federal level we have the incentives working correctly.
    I mean, many utilities have been focused for decades on selling
    as much power as possible, but we have to have the incentives
    for energy efficiency and conservation.
        So what is the--what do we need to be doing, from your
    point of view, on a clean energy standard and an energy
    efficiency standard?
        Ms. Fisher. Thank you so much for the question, Chair. As a
    sort of preliminary matter, actually our members have been
    delivering energy efficiency solutions to our customers for a
    really long time and have been partners with our state
    regulators to find ways to help our customers use less energy
    and control their energy costs. I think we are kind of unique
    in that we are the only people that actively help people use
    less of our product. And we have saved, you know, terabytes,
    trillions and trillions of megawatt hours of electricity over
    the last decades on energy efficiency.
        So we definitely agree that one of the first tools for
    managing emissions is efficiency, and we look forward to
    continuing to partner with our customers and our state
    regulators on those processes.
        Ms. Castor. Well, I have run out of time. So hopefully you
    can address the clean energy standard down the road. Thank you.
        Next, I will recognize Ranking Member Graves for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate all the
    witnesses' testimony.
        Ms. Apsey, I want to ask a question. We have talked about
    some pretty substantial investments required to kind of
    modernize the grid. Do you see sufficient capital just in your
    work in the states--I believe in the Midwest--where you have
    been operating? Do you see sufficient capital that is available
    and being invested in transmission?
        Ms. Apsey. Absolutely. Thank you for that question. Yeah,
    absolutely. I would not say that the issue or concern with
    investment in transmission is access to capital. I think what
    the issue and concern is more in terms of, obviously, the
    amount of time it takes to plan, to receive the necessary
    approvals. And, obviously, you know, these are major, major
    large transmission projects that take time in and of themselves
    to construct.
        And so from an investor perspective, you know, investors
    want clarity. They want stability and policies, right, as they
    consider making those investments into businesses like ours or
    any other utility. Investors need stability.
        Certainly, you know, we--you know, we--you know, for us,
    access to capital is not the concern. It is more the inherent
    processes and the amount of time it takes to realize that
    investment in transmissions.
        Mr. Graves. Thank you.
        Could you talk about perhaps--and I know you have had all
    sorts of experiences, but maybe talk about an experience where
    you had especially bad memories in terms of trying to move
    forward on a transmission project, perhaps, where you ran into
    regulatory obstacles or got stuck in the do-loop?
        Ms. Apsey. Sure. Well, thankfully, I would say the good
    news is, you know, because to date most of our investments in
    transmission have been sort of, I would say, within our own
    footprints, our own geography, our own control, and we worked
    very well through our RTOs, our stakeholder processes, our
    communities, in order to, you know, site and permit those
    facilities.
        You know, one project I would identify, it was first
    identified through this MISO RTO, you know, portfolio of
    projects, and that is our Cardinal-Hickory Creek Project. So it
    has been in the planning process and the execution phase for
    over 10 years now and, you know, we have spent considerable
    time, considerable years, going through the necessary, you
    know, environmental reviews, environmental processes, working
    with all the various stakeholders. And, you know, while we
    continue to move forward with that project, there is pending
    litigation.
        And so, obviously, from a risk perspective, a certainty
    perspective, obviously, those types of things just can serve to
    delay the ultimate realization of the benefits that that type
    of project would bring.
        Mr. Graves. Ms. Apsey, is it fair to say that in many cases
    that some of these process obstacles are preventing the
    deployment or transmission of clean energy in some cases?
        Ms. Apsey. Yeah. Well, certainly, that is one hurdle, one
    obstacle, as I mentioned. You know, there is multiple hurdles
    in realizing transmission investment, you know, planning----
        Mr. Graves. OK. Let me--thank you very much.
        And I just I want to make reference. We have introduced
    legislation called the BUILDER Act that tries to reform at
    least part of this process, and certainly would appreciate any
    feedback that you or your folks would have based on some of the
    experiences that you had in trying to build transmission.
        I want to say this again. I said it in the opening. I do
    think that the Chair and I, and I think everybody on the
    committee, shares concerns about the--this regulatory process
    and how we ensure that it is scaled or tailored in a way that
    allows us to actually realize the benefits of a modernized grid
    and some of the new energy sources that will be transmitted.
        Ms. Fisher--and I apologize. I think I made reference to
    your either middle or maiden name--sorry about that--when I
    referenced your testimony earlier. But just want to ask you if
    you have any thoughts or feedback on some of the regulatory
    reforms that perhaps would be needed, keeping in mind the
    tripling, perhaps, of the capacity that you have noted in your
    testimony?
        Ms. Fisher. Thank you for the question, Ranking Member
    Graves. And you made my dad really happy by mentioning my
    maiden name, so thank you.
        You know, we have engaged with both this administration and
    the prior administration on efficient NEPA reviews in
    particular, and there are ways to make those processes be a
    little bit more efficient, take less time, but still be totally
    faithful to the environmental goals and purposes of that
    statute. You know, it is an information-gathering statute, not
    an outcome-determinative statute, and there are some basic
    process improvements that I included in my testimony, my
    written testimony.
        But, for example, one of the things that we think would be
    truly important is being able to use the same Record of
    Decision that one agency developed if another agency also has a
    permitting authority. That seems like an important way to avoid
    duplication. That--you know, we also think that the project
    proponents, like Ms. Apsey, should have a role in being able to
    provide relevant information to the agency that is conducting
    the review. They are closest to the projects and they have the
    most information.
        One really important change for us actually would be a more
    holistic approach to greenhouse gas emissions so we could
    actually recognize the greenhouse gas benefits that these
    projects provide. We are often not allowed to do that and not
    to contextualize these projects appropriately.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Graves. Thank you. Appreciate it.
        Ms. Castor. Next, we will go to Rep. Brownley.
        Ms. Brownley. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you all for
    being here this morning.
        Ms. Apsey, my first question is, it is my understanding
    that the House E&C Committee has proposed a new program for the
    Department of Energy that would provide Federal assistance and
    technical assistance to state, local, and Tribal authorities to
    help them better participate in this process. Do you think such
    a program would help in terms of, you know, the overall
    acceleration of the, you know, 10-plus-year timeline it takes
    to--that we often see with transmission development?
        Ms. Apsey. While I don't have any specific knowledge or
    information on what you are specifically referring to, you
    know, stakeholder processes are important. All of our business
    operations we participate through regional transmission
    organizations which have stakeholder processes. We then are
    further involved in stakeholder processes through any of the
    siting--state siting processes or Federal siting processes.
        So my recommendation would certainly be that--and perhaps
    to Ms. Fisher's point--I think anything that we can do to drive
    more collaboration and coordination, you know, sort of under,
    if you will, one umbrella, I think would be most important and
    most valuable so that we don't add additional time to the
    process. We already go through multiple levels of stakeholder
    interaction, stakeholder collaboration, and certainly every
    voice is important in that process.
        Ms. Brownley. Thanks. And you also mentioned, you know, the
    investment tax credit being an important tool in the toolbox.
    And, you know, there have been many who have estimated that if
    we did the investment tax credit correctly, that could yield 20
    to 30 gigawatts of additional capacity to the grid. Do you
    think that is the proper yield strictly through an ITC or does
    that mean--do we have to do the ITC with modifications to
    regulations wrapped around it?
        Ms. Apsey. I would strongly suggest that we need both. I
    think we need an all-in approach. I don't think there is a
    silver bullet. Transmission is incredibly complex. It takes a
    very long time to plan and to receive the necessary approvals
    and then ultimately construction.
        We have processes in place today that have worked and that
    have yielded significant benefits for consumers. So I don't
    think--I don't think we are looking to make a wholesale shift
    in how we pay or incentivize transmission. I think we have got
    a lot of existing processes that do work, but I certainly think
    we do need additional tools in the toolbox, as well as some
    regulatory reforms.
        Ms. Brownley. Thank you.
        And I have got a little bit more time.
        Mr. Skelly, you have mentioned your, you know, siting of
    many shovel-ready projects. And would an ITC, you know, get
    those moving quickly? And what kind of yield would that bring
    in terms of expansion to the grid?
        Mr. Skelly. Yeah, I do think it would be very helpful for
    two reasons. There is two types of transmission lines. One that
    are cost allocated that come out of the planning process. And
    because our current processes don't take into account growth
    and things like electrification and don't take into account
    carbon emissions, that failure to account for them means that
    they don't make it through the planning hurdles. Okay? And ITC,
    by bringing down the cost, would get more projects through the
    planning process and we get more built.
        On merchant lines, i.e., developed by independent
    developers, you basically get paid to move power and--but you
    also provide reliability and ancillary services benefits to the
    grid, which you often don't get paid for as an independent. And
    an ITC, while an imperfect mechanism, okay, provides some sort
    of rough justice and helps get these merchant projects done,
    and in a sort of roundabout way compensates them for the
    benefits that they provide to the grid.
        Ms. Brownley. And, you know, I don't have much time. So I
    will yield back, Madam Chair.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Rep. Brownley.
        Rep. Palmer, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Palmer. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        First of all, I want to address the issue of the cost of
    this and the reliability of it. There was an audit of the
    German electrical grid. You know, they have done away with coal
    and nuclear and they have tried to go to renewables, and this
    audit found that electricity prices, residential electricity
    prices in Germany are 43 percent higher than the average for
    the other EU countries, and their electricity prices were
    already high. According to the report, it caused chaos to
    producers and consumers and threatened the German economy. So I
    find it interesting that my colleagues across the aisle keep
    saying that this is going to be cheaper than the way we produce
    electricity right now.
        So, Mr. Skelly, I just, because our--I know we are talking
    about a complete replacement of the grid, but even that will
    still require a consistent baseload. How do you expect to
    achieve that without some backup?
        Mr. Skelly. Okay. So we have a few big advantages over the
    Germans. We have much better wind and much better solar
    resources, and because of that, that makes our costs
    dramatically lower.
        In terms of reliability, one thing that we know about
    network systems is network systems--and we saw this with
    Colonial Pipeline last week--if we had had a whole network of
    pipes, okay, we wouldn't have relied on just one pipe. So when
    you build a network system, you always get better reliability.
    And what we are talking about here----
        Mr. Palmer. Mr. Skelly, from an engineering perspective,
    unlike natural gas, which you can increase the output almost
    immediately, you can't do that with wind and solar. It requires
    substantial battery storage. And just--MIT reports that just
    getting to 12 hours, storage will cost $2.5 trillion. And I
    assume that you are counting on the taxpayers to pay for that.
        The fact that Germany is in the position it is in with its
    electric grid may be explaining--may help explain why they are
    so desperate to cut this deal with Germany.
        In regard to permitting, I think that is a huge issue for
    us. I mean, under the current permitting regime right now, you
    can't even get the paperwork done in the timeframe that my
    Democrat colleagues think that the planet has left.
        But if we expedite the permitting, would each of you be
    okay with building transmission lines across wetlands and
    rivers and sensitive habitat which holds up so much of our
    infrastructure construction right now?
        Would you be fine with that, Ms. Apsey? It is a yes or no.
    It is a yes or no.
        Ms. Apsey. Well, certainly, yes, anything to expedite. But
    certainly there are considerations that obviously we want to be
    sure that we don't find ourselves in litigation that would
    further extend the timeline.
        Mr. Palmer. That leads me to--the next question is for Ms.
    Fisher. You in your testimony talked about litigation being a
    significant factor in infrastructure projects. Do you see how
    these issues that we have been dealing with for years will
    continue to persist in the permitting process? And if you can
    be very brief, I would appreciate it.
        Ms. Fisher. I think some clear direction on permitting
    might help resolve some ongoing litigation challenges.
        Mr. Palmer. Okay. There is a couple of other things I want
    to point out about this having a consistent network. One is
    that it will require inverters, going back to what I was trying
    to explain about the fact that you can't just ramp up your
    power load with renewables immediately. And China is really
    inserting themselves into that. That, I think, creates some
    national security concerns for us and particularly when we are
    so reliant on China already for rare earth minerals and other
    minerals that we are not mining nor refining nor manufacturing
    ourselves.
        Wouldn't that create a major problem down the road,
    increasing our reliance on China, Ms. Fisher?
        Ms. Fisher. We are very committed to the cybersecurity of
    our supply chain. And we have been talking with all of the
    parts of that supply chain, particularly with respect to
    inverters, to ensure that they are cyber-safe. It is a priority
    for all of our companies.
        Mr. Palmer. Madam Chairman, just a point of personal
    privilege here. I do think there is another issue that we need
    to take into account, and that is the potential for major solar
    flares, known as a coronal mass ejection. Lloyd's of London has
    major concerns about it. And what we once considered a once-in-
    100-years episode, we are now saying has a 4 to 13 percent or
    12 percent chance of happening in a decade. And I think the
    committee should at some point take that under consideration.
        I was shocked yesterday to find out that Energy Secretary
    Granholm knew nothing about that, even though it has been
    something that has been worked on the last three
    administrations.
        So if----
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Rep. Palmer. Let's work on that.
        Mr. Palmer. I appreciate that. And I yield back.
        Ms. Castor. Next, we will go to Representative Huffman for
    5 minutes.
        Mr. Huffman. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks for
    this hearing. I think, once again, you have found a space in
    this climate debate where there is--there is ample room to work
    together and collaborate and do things that shouldn't be
    controversial, that seemingly are pretty obvious.
        We know expanding and modernizing our country's electrical
    grid is key to unlocking the next phase of access to clean,
    reliable, affordable, renewable energy. As we have heard here
    today, a clean energy grid is the foundation really for
    decarbonizing all sectors of the economy, from transportation
    to buildings to industry.
        But, you know, for years, we have been told, mostly by the
    fossil fuel industry but also by some grid operators and
    utilities, that this vision of a carbon-free power grid powered
    mainly by renewables is unrealistic. Even just a few years ago
    when I was a California legislator, I was told that our, at
    that time, 33 percent renewable portfolio standard was
    unattainable.
        But 3 weeks ago, Madam Chair, something really interesting
    happened. For a few minutes, California hit a remarkable
    milestone. Ninety-five percent of our electricity came from
    renewables. We have been bringing solar, wind, and storage
    online faster than anyone previously predicted.
        And suddenly, the conversation is not about if we can hit
    our 100 percent clean energy goal, but whether we can do it
    faster than 2035. And it brings to mind this principle of a
    broken window at which things that are thought to be impossible
    suddenly become inevitable. And no matter how much the
    opponents of clean energy tried to pull that over to a window
    back to the previous century's thinking, there is nothing like
    seeing the fifth largest economy in the world powered almost
    entirely by renewables or an all-electric F-150 that blows away
    the internal combustion version of that iconic truck. So it
    proves that the times are changing, and our job should be to
    make sure that change comes in time to save the planet.
        So, Mr. Skelly, would you speak to this question of what is
    possible when it comes to incorporation of renewable sources of
    energy onto the grid? How can we achieve this 100 percent clean
    energy goal? Is it doable?
        Mr. Skelly. Well, first off, I put in my deposit for a
    electric F-150 last night so I am very excited about those as
    well.
        And second, I share your fascination with the topic on,
    like, how much renewable energy can we put on the grid. And I
    have been doing this stuff for, like, 25 years. And when we
    started out, the grid operators, said, oh, wow, if we go over 5
    percent, like, we don't know how we are going to keep the
    lights on here. And this crazy, what you guys are talking
    about, even with a small project.
        And what we found is that everybody is more capable at
    figuring this out, a lot more quickly than we ever imagined. So
    the grid operators have figured it out, the meteorology has
    gotten better, the technology has gotten better. And we have
    all just sort of learned and this is how we have gotten to 98
    percent. I mean, here in Texas we regularly go over 50 percent
    renewables. If somebody had told me that that was going to
    happen 20 years ago--and I was, like, an industry advocate--I
    would say, like, no way. That is never going to happen. You are
    out of your mind.
        But to the point on transmission, one of the things--and
    NREL has done some very interesting work on this topic--one of
    the things we found is that if we want to increase a
    percentage, transmission helps us do this. And MISO, one of our
    most important grid operators, what they have discovered is
    that fronts move from the West to the East. And because we
    built out the grid in the upper Midwest, that allows us to
    distribute the wind across the Plains, because in the Western
    Plains, it is blowing hard but not yet in the Eastern Plains,
    if the front moves across, then they can move the energy back
    to the West.
        Mr. Huffman. Thank you for that.
        Mr. Skelly. So it is a really important piece to address
    some of these issues that we are going to tackle and we have
    proven we can tackle. And----
        Mr. Huffman. I appreciate that. I just have a moment left.
    In addition to more renewable energy, of course we want a grid
    that doesn't spark fires every time the wind blows.
        And so Ms. Apsey, I want to ask you, as someone who
    represents arid California, how will these grid modernization
    investments also address the fire-prone nature of our current
    grid?
        And I know I am out of time so I will yield back in
    advance, Madam Chair. But if there is time to allow a brief
    answer, I would greatly appreciate it.
        Ms. Castor. Let's take that for the record, because we have
    a vote that has been called.
        And my intention is to go for as long as possible. And we
    may have to take a quick recess at the end of the time period
    for the first vote.
        So Mrs. Miller, if you are ready I will recognize you for 5
    minutes.
        Mrs. Miller. Thank you, Chair Castor and Ranking Member
    Graves. And thanks to all of you all for being here today.
        I agree with my colleagues that modernizing our electric
    grid is paramount. A strong and reliable grid ensures that we
    can continue to keep our lights on in our homes, our schools,
    and our businesses and reduce our carbon emissions. There is
    certainly space for renewables in our grid modernization.
        However, I think we all understand that renewables are not
    currently in a place to power the entire grid. We must ensure
    that we have a key baseload energy--coal and natural gas--to
    fill in the gaps to keep the lights on when renewables cannot.
    I am sure my colleagues from down South can attest to this and
    the importance of having a resilient grid, particularly after
    the storms that were down there as well as in my state in West
    Virginia.
        In order for our grid to be reliable, we need to ensure
    energy can be transported quickly and efficiently. Pipelines
    are infrastructure. The actions this administration has taken
    on the Keystone Pipeline not only cost American jobs but will
    cost the American energy grid. Ms. Fisher, how important is
    baseload energy, such as coal and natural gas, to balancing the
    electric grid?
        Ms. Fisher. Thank you very much for the question,
    Congresswoman. We use a very diverse range of resources to
    ensure that we are able to provide reliable electricity. So
    right now we do rely on resources like nuclear, natural gas,
    and coal to provide electricity and to address variability in
    renewable resources.
        Many EEI members see a path to 80 percent emission
    reductions using current technologies including renewables and
    storage, but we are focused on developing those clean 24/7
    resources that will help us provide reliability long-term as we
    continue to decarbonize.
        So thank you for the recognition of the importance of that.
        Mrs. Miller. Well, you had mentioned in your testimony that
    natural gas is one of the factors that are helping to drive
    clean energy transformation. What else is needed to increase
    the deployment of natural gas?
        Ms. Fisher. We actually are the largest users of natural
    gas in the country right now, Representative. So we use natural
    gas right now to provide more than--I think it is close to 40
    percent of the electricity generated in the United States last
    year. So we rely on that. And we want to make sure that we have
    continued access for it as we are developing those clean
    technologies that will allow us to provide 24/7 support in a
    cleaner future.
        Mrs. Miller. Well, what positive changes could be made to
    our energy infrastructure to decrease the cost to the
    consumers?
        Ms. Fisher. We have been very fortunate, thank you for the
    question, that we have been able to reduce emissions 40 percent
    over the last about 5 to 7 years while----
        Mrs. Miller. Wow.
        Ms. Fisher [continuing]. Keeping the energy crisis flat.
    But we are constantly concerned about the impacts to customers.
    And I think there are ways to help mitigate some of the
    potential increases in costs to customers.
        There was some discussion today about the value of the ITC
    for transmission and mitigating cost. We also see some value in
    mitigating costs to address the wildfire issue, to help us
    offset the cost of some of the hardening that we will need to
    take to make sure that the grid is resilient to different
    hazards across the country.
        Mrs. Miller. Thank you so much.
        Chairman, I yield back whatever time I have left.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Representative Miller.
        Next we go to Representative Levin.
        You are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Levin. Thank you, Chair Castor. Thank you for holding
    his hearing. And I do appreciate the bipartisan nature of the
    topic today.
        Mr. Colston, I wanted to first give a shout to the IBEW in
    my area, San Diego in Orange County. I have great relationships
    with them. And I know they are excited about the future of the
    electric grid and the role that IBEW will play. We know when
    President Biden talks about climate, it is always jobs, jobs,
    jobs. The American Jobs Plan, of course, focusing on a lot of
    this. And I wanted to ask you what jobs impact do you expect
    the highlighted aspects of President Biden's proposal to have?
    And bottom line, what will this mean for your membership?
        Mr. Colston. Clearly the IBEW is fully supportive in all of
    the evolved fuel sources. When we talk about that it is
    infrastructure. Infrastructure creates jobs. Technology creates
    jobs for the IBEW. As we build out the grid itself, that allows
    the IBEW to bring in more members to build out the grid itself.
        As we electrify IBEW's fully supportive of electrifying the
    grid as it is. Electric charging station in as many places that
    we can. That produces jobs as well. And when we talk about
    technology, technology made in the United States, that produces
    good manufacturing jobs. So the whole transition as it takes
    place, working with our utility partners and also our
    construction partners as we transition that creates good
    valuable union jobs, blue collar jobs.
        Mr. Levin. Terrific. Well, I was excited about that Ford F-
    150 Lightning announcement last night. Also, though, I don't
    think my wife's going to let me buy a new car any time soon.
    But when I do, it is going to be another union made electric
    car. So that was great.
        I wanted to turn to planning for the siting of renewable
    energy projects, I heard some about this. And particularly on
    our public lands, I have been supportive of what they call
    Smart from the Start where we designate development zones that
    are best for certain renewables so that they don't conflict
    with other land uses. And I know that the Interior Department
    has engaged in this type of planning for transmission as well.
        Ms. Apsey and Mr. Skelly, do you see value in this type of
    Smart from the Start planning for transmission? And if so, what
    are the best strategies to minimize impacts and conflicts
    caused by new transmission lines? And are they applicable to
    both public and private lands?
        Whoever wants to go first.
        Ms. Apsey. I am happy to jump in. Thank you for that
    question.
        Yeah, absolutely. Look, I mean I think if we look at
    Michigan established about approximately 10 years ago, they
    took an approach through legislation that established
    identifying the areas in the state that had the highest wind
    potential. And then through legislation it essentially
    instructed the transmission providers to build the necessary
    transmission to harvest as much wind. This was sort of a
    renewable energy zone. Texas went through a similar process. It
    is a very successful effort, a very successful process.
        You know, look, we know in this country, we know where the
    wind blows. We know where the sun shines. And so, as we talk
    about planning a transmission planning process first, this
    would be consistent I think with what you are suggesting. And
    that is, right now what we do is we build transmission to
    interconnect everywhere a generator may site, whether it is
    optimal or suboptimal.
        It is sort of like the movie the Field of Dreams, sort of
    build it and they will come. If we build the transmission where
    we know the renewable potential is, those renewable developers
    will locate around the transmission line because the cost of
    the transmission for the way we ask generators to pay for it is
    prohibitive because the person who gets assigned the cost
    responsibility it just makes the project null and void.
        So we would be big supporters, big proponents of sort of a
    transmission first approach based on where we know the
    resources in the country are located.
        Mr. Levin. Mr. Skelly, with the time I have left, I along
    with many of my colleagues think that modernizing, expanding
    electric grid ought to be a bipartisan subject where we find
    common ground. And I was just curious what your view is as an
    entrepreneur, who lives in Houston, Texas, on that?
        Mr. Skelly. Yeah. Well, I think at the state-level we have
    seen that it is a bipartisan issue. And you know, in Texas, we
    did the biggest expansion of the grid, originally initiated by
    Governor Perry and then followed through on Governor Abbott.
        So it can be a bipartisan--or one party or the other does
    it. It doesn't even have to be bipartisan, both parties seem to
    do this. So I am confident we can get something done.
        Mr. Levin. I am too, Mr. Skelly. Let's work together. Let's
    find common ground. Let's get it done.
        Chair Castor, I yield back. Thank you.
        Ms. Castor. Thank, Representative Levin.
        Next we will go to Representative Armstrong.
        You are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Armstrong. Thank you. I am just reading the LA Times
    and I think it is great that we get somewhere to this point,
    but the LA Times, a 94.5 percent figure was fleeting, lasting
    just 4 seconds and was specific to the state's main power grid
    which covered four-fifths of California, but doesn't include
    Los Angeles, Sacramento, and several other regions. So I think
    it is great, I think it is partial.
        But I just, you know, we are talking about these Federal
    right-of-ways and I think that is a great idea. And as we are
    having an honest conversation about building out this
    infrastructure, it is essential to expanding and, modernizing
    the grid, we have to continue to talk about permitting. And I
    have brought this up in multiple hearings because it is at the
    core of many of the policy changes being talked about by both
    Democrats and Republicans.
        And at the Federal level, we already have the Federal
    Permitting Improvement Steering Council that oversees the
    Federal permitting process and resolves conflicts.
    Unfortunately, the Council's authorization sunsets in the
    coming years.
        Last Congress, I introduced a bill with Senator Portman and
    several Democratic Senators to eliminate and expand the
    process. I mean, and the reality is many of these energy
    projects--traditional energy projects or renewable projects--
    will never come to fruition unless we maintain a neutral
    permitting structure that is dependable, timely, and
    reasonable.
        And we know this, as we continue to deploy this, we are
    going to have to talk about the existing rights of way, but--I
    am sorry--but we know we will need more land to distribute this
    generation.
        So Ms. Fisher, how do we improve the permitting process to
    allow more rights-of-way? Because as things stand, we just
    simply don't have enough land available for distributed
    generation.
        Ms. Fisher. Well, I think that you have identified--thank
    you for the question. I think that you have identified
    coordination among differing permitting authorities is really
    important, and extending that authority so that Council can
    continue to operate would be useful.
        You know, Federal and state permitting processes need to
    work together well. States do have a lot of control over what
    is cited in them. And we believe bringing in state partners
    early into the discussion is really important. But, you know,
    it is looking at efficient ways to get multiuse out of pieces
    of land.
        I will note that it is not incompatible with public lands
    to run transmission through it. And that transmission often
    comes with really large conservation easements that preserve
    and protect land. So I think there are lots of ways to look at
    multiuse.
        Mr. Armstrong. Well, I just want to piggyback off of that a
    little bit. One, I mean, when you are doing the state
    permitting, if it is not common carrier, right--like North
    Dakota is a state that does not allow eminent domain. Right?
    And so you are having those different transitions. But you talk
    about those--actually, we did obviously during the oil boom, we
    tried to get a lot of pipe and transmission in the ground in
    Western North Dakota. And my friends and colleagues in the
    industry asked us how we can do that? I say, go back in time
    and give the county easements, because on county roads in North
    Dakota private landowners own to the middle of the road.
        But when you are talking about these conservation easements
    as we talk into the litigation as an ongoing issue that delays
    the deployment of transportation--I mean, this isn't unique to
    electrical transmission. This exists whether it is a highway, a
    pipeline, a high voltage line. How do we address--do you have
    some ideas of how we address that?
        Ms. Fisher. People don't necessarily love living near
    infrastructure even when they benefit from it. That is a
    pervasive problem. I do think that you have identified some
    appropriate ways of looking at how we site a lot of
    infrastructure and run right-of-way to sort of minimize
    impacts. I think that could be really helpful.
        And we have seen some of our members do that, for example,
    while they are deploying fiberoptic cable for their own uses,
    they are also using that to bring middle mile broadband to
    other customers who might not have access to that. So there are
    ways to piggyback. Our infrastructure can be used for a lot of
    other purposes. We do share a lot with the telecommunications
    industry for example.
        Mr. Armstrong. Well, I think one of the things we don't
    recognize enough is with multiple agencies often completing
    duplicative reviews, not only does take much more time, but it
    creates several different areas in which--as is often the case
    in a lot of these litigated cases, they don't care necessarily
    which permit you violate. They just care that you violated one
    of them or they have a case. So if we could get some of that
    streamlined to get rid of the duplicative processing, do you
    think we would also reduce some of the litigation?
        Ms. Fisher. That would probably reduce some litigation.
    Thank you.
        Mr. Armstrong. And with that, I guess, Garret, I have 14
    seconds if you want it or I will just yield back.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you very much, Representative Armstrong.
    I think the other Democrats are hustling back from the votes.
    So we will go to Representative Crenshaw.
        Welcome, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Crenshaw. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for
    holding this important hearing.
        I always want to preface everything we say we want to get
    to the same goal, a reduction in global carbon emissions. I
    want to get there in a smart way without destroying our
    economy. And I think the solutions we offer generally are a
    faster way to get there, to be perfectly honest. I want to
    actually follow up on what Mr. Armstrong was talking about.
        Mr. Skelly, you authored a report on 22 transmission
    projects that are ready to go and even met with senior members
    of the administration to discuss building them. However,
    projects are on the shovel ready list have been on the list for
    a decade plus. How many of the 22 projects are active and have
    experienced more than 5 years of delay?
        Mr. Skelly. I would say yeah, they have been--well, the
    list is a new list so they haven't been on the same list, but
    they have been underway for at least a decade on average. Okay?
        Mr. Crenshaw. Yeah.
        Mr. Skelly. And there is a few reasons why they haven't
    moved forward. One is permitting delays. The other is failures
    in the cost allocation process that we talked about a little
    while ago. And that is, in other words, a failure to consider
    all the benefits of the transmission. And the other is a
    failure of the system to basically reward some of the merchant
    developers for the additional services that they provide so.
        Mr. Crenshaw. And one of the things we see of course is
    weaponization of the court system. I mean, talking about
    Cardinal-Hickory Creek, maybe I will move to Ms. Apsey for this
    since you all are in charge of this one. Why is that facing
    delays? Is it eminent domain, permitting, financing, political
    will, or is it mired in lawsuits?
        Ms. Apsey. Yeah. It is facing delay based on pending
    litigation, which is essentially an appeal, parties who are
    opposed to the project are appealing the process by which it
    went through for several years.
        Mr. Crenshaw. And do you think that these transmission
    projects are going to face similar litigation, and that would
    be a barrier to rolling out new transmission, especially well
    over 120 percent additional new transmission, which is what our
    fellows at Princeton seem to believe would be necessary to meet
    our goals?
        Ms. Apsey. Yeah. There certainly is a history of many major
    transmission projects being delayed through litigation, you
    know. And obviously, as we have talked about before, I mean,
    time. Time is of the essence if we want to realize the benefits
    both in terms of integrating renewables, the reliability, the
    resiliency benefits. And so time is of the essence. And these
    projects in and of themselves, even when everything goes as
    planned and well, can take anywhere from 7 to 10 years to
    realize.
        Mr. Crenshaw. Which is far too long. And look, this is the
    broader point I am trying to make here, step two is paying for
    this stuff and building it. Step one is actually allowing
    ourselves to build it. If we don't address the permitting
    issues in this country, which are far more stringent than most
    developed nations, we are never going to get to the part where
    we build 120 percent more transmission lines in America. We are
    never going to get to that point. There is no point in
    allocating around $3 trillion to do this if it is just going to
    be weaponized by the courts and weaponized by environmental
    groups.
        So I would ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
    to consider this, the clean energy goals are directly in
    conflict with the environmental groups as well because they are
    the ones who sue and settle. The law has to be changed. There
    is a lot of examples of this.
        In 2011, President Obama created the Rapid Response Team
    for Transmission to speed the permitting of five Western
    transmission line projects. Only one is under construction so
    far. Only one. The law needs to be changed. The proposed 300
    mile electricity line to deliver renewable electricity from
    Idaho to Oregon commenced permitting in 2010. Federal agencies
    can't find a way forward on more than 30 Federal and 50 state
    and local permitting actions, and another 100 water crossing
    approvals.
        Then I want to get to another broader point which is, is
    this even the right approach to try and build--build massive
    amounts and take up massive amounts of land for wind and solar
    in places where the sun shines, and in places where the wind
    blows, build out massive amounts of infrastructure and
    transmission lines, to get that to where we need it? Is that
    really even the right approach? Maybe we should rethink this.
        We could build, for that amount of money, countless nuclear
    plants. A nuclear plant, by the way, operates on a 1,000 acres
    versus the same power of a solar farm that operates on a
    100,000 acres. And the nuclear plant doesn't rely on weather.
    Guys, you know, I want us to rethink how we approach the
    problem that we all want to solve.
        Thank you I yield back.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Representative Crenshaw.
        Next we will go to Representative Casten and then we will
    go into a recess for 15 minutes.
        Representative Casten, you are recognized.
        Mr. Casten. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to all our
    members.
        Mr. Skelly, it is a pleasure to see you, one former energy
    developer to a current one. As I have long maintained, no one
    really understands the financial, the regulatory, all of the
    barriers to building projects like someone who has been in the
    trenches as long as you have.
        Americans for a Clean Energy Grid reported that as of 2019,
    there was 734 gigawatts, basically 73 percent of our entire
    grid, stuck in interconnection queues, mostly waiting for
    debates over who is going to be responsible for paying for the
    transmission upgrades. In the meantime, in Illinois where I
    live, the SOO Green Project, that is a HVDC, no generation
    associated with it, would bring cheap, renewable energy from
    Ohio into Chicago markets to ease congestion, is hung up in
    generator interconnection queues.
        Last month, I introduced a bill with Senator Heinrich that
    would require FERC to issue a rulemaking on interregional
    transmission that would explicitly recognize the benefit of low
    CO2 sources and bring them online quicker.
        But what I wonder, Mr. Skelly, is if that is enough. We
    have got this problem, that I don't think any of you have
    addressed, but I want to give you a chance to talk about it,
    given some of your history.
        We have a real problem in ISO/RTO governance. The
    governance structures of those organizations is often dictated
    by members who have--and they have the best of intentions, but
    as you know well, they have got a vested economic interest,
    sometimes, in maintaining congested and high prices in their
    region, which is precisely the problem that these projects we
    are talking about would alleviate.
        Can you just speak a little bit from your experience about
    some of the issues with ISO/RTO governance. And if you were
    king tomorrow, do you have any easy fixes that would still
    recognize their critical need and recognize the expertise of
    their members but get rid of some of the conflicts of interest?
        Mr. Skelly. Yeah. I mean, having suffered personally at the
    hands of a generator who didn't want us to interconnect on a
    number of occasions, it really is an issue. And this does feel
    like an area of ripe for FERC action and restructuring the
    governance of the RTOs to accommodate more entrants, okay,
    which is really what we are talking about. We are talking about
    enhancing competition by permitting more folks to enter the
    process.
        I think it would be very helpful. And Texas has I think has
    a great example of that. The interconnection process is very
    straightforward. It is fast. You get quick results. You are
    then in the interview market and you are kind of on your own,
    whether or not you are going to make money. But it is a process
    that has proven gets a lot of generation online quickly.
        Mr. Casten. I would love for you to comment on this, Ms.
    Fisher. I mean, a lot of the people who are in those governance
    decisions are your members, you know. Would you agree with the
    issue as I framed it? And to the extent that you can, what do
    you think it would take to get some of your members to really
    advocate for the changes necessary to essentially do something
    that may be, you know, against their short-term economic
    interests?
        Ms. Fisher. Thank you very much for the question,
    Representative. I might not fully agree that people enjoy
    keeping congestion functioning for the purpose of increasing
    prices. But I think everyone agrees that ISO/RTO governance
    hinders progress and makes it difficult for people to make
    decisions within those structures quickly and in a timeframe
    that is consistent with the problems we are trying to solve.
        I think everyone is concerned about generator
    interconnection queues and how long they are, and how
    potentially inefficient those processes are, and to look
    forward to FERC working with the governance of those entities
    to figure out how do you move things through that queue more
    quickly, how to allocate costs for generators who are trying to
    interconnect more quickly.
        I don't think anyone thinks that those processes are
    efficient as they need to be. Despite the literally sometimes
    thousands and thousands of people who participate in them.
        Mr. Casten. Okay. Well, I am getting near the end of my
    time, but I would welcome any of your thoughts on
    legislatively--I think it's very easy for us all in this body
    to punt to FERC, but since we are waiting 20 years on some of
    these things, I take your comments, Ms. Apsey, that Order 1000
    wasn't perfect. But the core is the same issue. Right? There is
    just these conflicts of interests between groups, especially
    when we get to regional connections.
        And I guess I would just remind everybody, including my
    friend Mr. Crenshaw, that it is comparatively really easy to
    permit gas pipelines in this country. We have made it
    chronically difficult to permit transmission. And a big part of
    that is the governance structure, a big part of that is the
    failure to have a single point of control on these projects.
        And I welcome all of your thoughts on what we might do
    legislatively to move that a little bit faster than the snail's
    pace it has moved in the last 30 years.
        Thank you and I yield back.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Representative Casten. So we will
    reconvene the committee immediately after the second vote. So
    we stand in recess until that time.
        [Recess.]
        Ms. Castor. The committee will come to order. Thank you for
    bearing with us during votes on the floor.
        Next we will go to Representative Gonzalez. You are
    recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to our
    witnesses, our panel. The good news is I do think we have found
    one area where there is bipartisan agreement with respect to
    the need to modernize our grid. The how and why is always sort
    of the challenge, but we are certainly in agreement on that,
    and the events over the last year have played out to prove that
    case.
        I would like to associate myself with Congressman Graves's
    comments with respect to the cost. And then I always like to
    see my friend, Dan Crenshaw on, who centers us in reality. And
    I would like to start with something that I think will
    hopefully do the same.
        So the hearing opened with alluding to the terrible storms
    that are taking place in the southeast and obviously our heart
    goes out to everyone affected. So I went to NOAA's website and
    found the global warming and hurricanes overview of current
    research results here. And I want to read a statement, because
    I think it is important. We are getting to a point where any
    time a bad storm happens we blame climate change. And I will
    just read their summary.
        In summary, neither our model projections for the 21st
    century nor our analyses of trends in Atlantic hurricanes and
    tropical storm activity support the notion that greenhouse gas
    induced warming leads to large increases in either tropical
    storm or overall hurricane numbers in the Atlantic.
        While one of our modeling studies projects a large increase
    in Atlantic Cat 4 and 5 hurricanes over the 21st century, we
    estimate that such an increase would not be detectable until
    the latter half of the century. And we still have only a low
    confidence that such an increase will occur in the Atlantic
    basin.
        And of course it is also true that deaths from natural
    disasters globally over the last 100 years are down 92 percent,
    which is great. And then finally--and I think we have been
    talking about California as if it is an example of how we want
    our energy to exist broadly across the country. Again some data
    between 2011 and 2020, electricity prices in California rose
    seven times more than they did in the rest of the country. And
    at the same time, carbon emissions rose 4.1 percent in
    California, even as they declined 3.5 percent in the average
    over the remaining 49 states.
        So not something I want for Ohio. And I think we need to be
    smart about how we move forward. Focus on the things we agree
    on, but also fund the basic research that is necessary to
    invent our way out of what is certainly a challenge with
    respect to climate change and making sure that we do it in a
    smart, a smart way, that is affordable and lasting.
        So I want to start with Ms. Fisher. As I am sure you are
    well aware, Congress is currently debating and negotiating an
    infrastructure package that largely hinges on the question, how
    do you pay for it? If we are going to modernize and decarbonize
    the grid, we are going to have to attract more private capital.
    I think that is obvious.
        What sort of policies should we be pursuing to make these
    energy investments more attractive to private investors in your
    estimation?
        Ms. Fisher. Thank you very much for the question. My member
    companies are terrific at raising capital. As I mentioned,
    before we are the most capital intensive industry in the United
    States. And over the last 10 years, we have spent $1 trillion
    on grid modernization and related efforts. So what usually
    industry says remains true here. Some regulatory certainty and
    some clear direction usually helps us to attract capital and
    deploy it efficiently.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Great.
        And then Mr. Skelly, in your testimony you stated that if
    there were greater Federal investment, we would be able to
    carry out 22 high voltage transmission projects and increase
    solar and wind generation by 50 percent. Can you explain the
    impact that this would have on energy use? Because there is an
    important distinction between production and use. And obviously
    while the sun and wind are good energy sources, we still don't
    have reliable and widely useable ways to store the energy for
    days, weeks, or months.
        So how would this project solve that storage challenge,
    which I think is also a unique challenge?
        Mr. Skelly. So with electricity, because consumption and
    production are instantaneous, storage as you point out is
    important. And there are some interesting advances. I am on the
    board of a company called Form Energy and we are working hard
    at multiday storage and making good progress.
        The other way to think about it is with transmission, you
    can move energy around the country. And that actually can
    reduce some of the need for storage, because as we all know,
    the wind and sunshine are variable across the country. And
    moving energy in time as you point out is important, but also
    moving it in space can be just or even more helpful in doing
    so.
        Mr. Gonzalez. That also carries substantial cost. Right? If
    we are going to take Arizona sunshine and push it to call it
    Oklahoma, that is going to require some challenges.
        I see I am out of time. Sorry for that, but with that, I
    yield back. Thank you.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you.
        Representative Bonamici, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you so much, Chair Castor and Ranking
    Member Graves. And thank you to our witnesses.
        We know addressing the climate crisis and also
    strengthening investments in our electric grid will create
    millions of good paying, high quality jobs. And that can help
    especially displaced workers recover from the economic collapse
    that has been caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
        Last fall I had a great visit with apprentices out at the
    IBEW Local 48 in Portland. They have a partnership out there
    with NECA, the National Electrical Contractors Association.
    IBEW's electrical apprenticeship program demonstrates how our
    transition to a clean energy economy can provide this
    extraordinary opportunity to provide good paying jobs. The
    program is also an excellent example of why we need to protect
    and strengthening our registered apprenticeship system. And I
    am glad the House updated the apprenticeship bill, the first
    one since the 1930s.
        So I am one of the leaders on the Education and Labor
    Committee so I know we also have an obligation to address those
    critical failures and make sure that Federal clean energy
    investments uphold labor standards like Buy American, Davis-
    Bacon prevailing wage, use of community benefit agreements,
    project labor agreements. They all make a difference.
        So Mr. Colston, in your testimony, you noted that IBEW
    anticipates the need for at least 50,000 new linemen over the
    next 10 years. So how can Congress better support IBEW's
    efforts in both training the next generation, but also making--
    getting more workers, the workers that we need to help us
    [inaudible] in our clean energy transition?
        Mr. Colston. We at IBEW itself we have more than 300
    training centers throughout the United States; in almost all
    communities, we have a training center there. We partner with
    our partner utilities on training those linemen. We also
    partner with our contractors on training those linemen. And
    when the work is there, that allows us to take in additional
    IBEW apprentices.
        The apprenticeship program at the IBEW is unique as in the
    other skilled trades, as not only do we give you an education,
    but we are going to give you a job to put those practical
    skills to work at the exact same time, so they will go hand in
    hand.
        The way that Congress can help us is as more transmission
    lines are approved and actually get up and running and
    building, that puts more of our members to work. As we
    modernize the grid on the distribution system or even the
    downtown network system, as we modernize that, that technology
    allows our utility partners to add additional workforce to
    theirs too. So as a permitting and citing permits come into
    play as we determine where they are going and we can actually
    build for the future and not just building a transmission line
    that is just going to meet today's needs. We have the ability
    to bring on the workforce to do that as they are coming on.
        Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Colston, I don't want to cut you off, but
    you mentioned citing and I want to get in another question.
        So Mr. Skelly, when the Select Committee developed our
    climate action plan, we heard about the challenges of citing
    interstate transmission lines and overcoming those challenges
    was going to be key to improving resilience on the grid.
        So how will the Department of Transportation's recent
    guidance on using existing rights of way for transmission lines
    help address some of those challenges?
        And also, if Ms. Apsey can weight in, as Congress considers
    the American Jobs Plan, a once-in-a-generation comprehensive
    infrastructure package, what further Federal investments can
    help?
        So Mr. Skelly and then maybe we can get a little bit from
    Ms. Apsey.
        Mr. Skelly. Yeah. So I would say that on using existing
    rights of way, this is a fairly common practice. One when you
    are developing transmission lines, you try to use existing
    corridors or you follow pipelines, or railroads, or other
    existing infrastructure in order to minimize disturbance.
        What I think the guidance that was recently issued speaks
    to and it is incredibly important is that initiatives like this
    sort of raise the level of leadership around transmission. And
    those of us who have been doing this work for a long time are
    really heartened by the emphasis across the government, you
    all, the administration and so on, on what do we need to do to
    facilitate this infrastructure expansion.
        So that is maybe the most important element of the guidance
    that is coming out of DOT.
        Ms. Bonamici. That is really helpful.
        Ms. Apsey. Oh, gosh. Sorry. The clock ticked down, but do
    you have, like, one or two words on what further Federal
    investments can help the policies?
        Ms. Apsey. Yes, certainly. And again, just going back to
    accelerating timelines and bringing stakeholders together so
    that we can get the certainty that we need to move forward with
    this investment. Time is of the essence.
        Ms. Bonamici. Great. Thank you so much.
        I yield back. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Representative Bonamici.
        Well, I want to thank our witnesses for being with us
    today, for staying with us through votes on the floor of the
    House. You certainly have given us as an impetus to work in a
    bipartisan way to modernize America's electrical grid and
    expand clean energy. So thank you all.
        Without objection, I have a few things to enter into the
    record. First, the introduction from the April 2021 report by
    Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, titled Transmission Projects
    Ready to Go: Plugging Into America's Untapped Renewable
    Resources.
        The introduction from the May 2021 report by the American
    Council on Renewable Energy, titled Investment Tax Credit for
    Regionally Significant Electricity Transmission Lines.
        A May 20 letter from the American Council on Renewable
    Energy supporting investments in policies to upgrade and expand
    the electric grid.
        And a May 20, letter from the Solar Energy Industries
    Association supporting transmission investments to help achieve
    100 percent clean electricity.
        [The information follows:]

                           Submissions for the Record

                          Representative Kathy Castor

                     Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                                  May 20, 2021

    ATTACHMENT: Goggin, M., Gramlich, R., & Skelly, M. (2021 April).
    Transmission Projects Ready to Go: Plugging into America's Untapped
    Renewable Resources. Americans for a Clean Energy Grid.

    The report is retained in the committee files and available at:
            https://cleanenergygrid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/
            Transmission-Projects-Ready-to-Go-Final.pdf

    ATTACHMENT: Goggin, M. and Gramlich, R. (2021 May). Investment Tax
    Credit for Regionally Significant Electricity Transmission Lines: A
    Description and Analysis. American Council on Renewable Energy.

    The report is retained in the committee files and available at:
            https://acore.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Investment-Tax-
            Credit-for-
            Regionally-Significant-Electricity-Transmission-Lines-ACORE.pdf

                                       ++

                                     ACORE

                      American Council on Renewable Energy

    The Honorable Kathy Castor
    Chair
    U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
    H2-359 Ford House Office Building
    Washington D.C. 20515

    The Honorable Garret Graves
    Ranking Member
    U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
    H2-359 Ford House Office Building
    Washington D.C. 20515

    Dear Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves and Members of the Committee:

        The American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE) appreciates the
    opportunity to submit a letter for the record to the House Select
    Committee on the Climate Crisis's May 20, 2021 hearing entitled,
    ``Powering Up Clean Energy: Investments to Modernize and Expand the
    Electric Grid.'' ACORE works across renewable technologies and
    represents the nation's leading renewable energy developers,
    manufacturers and investors, along with corporate electricity
    consumers, electric utilities, manufacturers of energy storage and
    smart grid technologies, and the many other diverse industries that
    comprise the country's thriving renewable energy economy. Renewable
    energy and enabling grid technologies attracted over $68 billion in
    private sector investment in 2019, and our members are proud of
    renewable energy's contribution to American economic growth, job
    creation and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ American Council on Renewable Energy, Expectations for
    Renewable Energy Finance in 2020-2023, 2020. Accessed May 13, 2021 from
    https://
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    acore.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Expectations-for-Renewable-Energy-
    Finance-in-2020-2023.pdf.
        Initiatives to expand transmission lines and related enabling
    infrastructure (including energy storage) play a critical role as part
    of comprehensive climate recommendations and are an indispensable
    feature of any plan to address the climate crisis by reducing GHG
    emissions. The 15 states between the Rockies and the Mississippi River
    account for 88% of the country's wind technical potential and 56% of
    the country's utility-scale solar technical potential but account for
    only 30% of projected electricity demand by 2050. These resources
    cannot be developed without a plan for building interregional
    transmission that can deliver power to high-density population centers.
    A nationwide, high-voltage direct current (HVDC) network, optimized for
    the nation's best wind and solar resources, could reduce carbon dioxide
    emissions from the U.S. electricity sector by up to 80% relative to
    1990 levels without an increase in the levelized cost of electricity.
    Such a network would enable the U.S. to generate 60% of its electricity
    using wind and solar resources alone.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Macro Grid Initiative, Transmission & Climate Change, 2021.
    Accessed May 13, 2021 from https://acore.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/
    12/Macro-Grid-Initiative-Transmission-and-Climate-Change-Fact-
    Sheet.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Grid expansion will also drive economic recovery and job creation.
    A recent report from Americans for a Clean Energy Grid identified 22
    shovel-ready, high-voltage transmission projects across the country
    that would create approximately 1,240,000 family-sustaining jobs and
    enable 60,000 megawatts (MW) of new renewable energy capacity,
    increasing America's wind and solar generation by nearly 50 percent.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, Transmission Projects Ready
    to Go: Plugging Into America's Untapped Renewable Resources, 2021.
    Accessed May 17, 2021 from https://cleanenergygrid.org/wp-content/
    uploads/2019/04/Transmission-Projects-Ready-to-Go-Final.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        A recent ACORE report detailed the growing consensus that
    transmission provides large net benefits to electricity consumers.\4\
    Transmission provides consumers access to lower-cost forms of
    electricity generation, including high-quality renewable energy
    resources. This report joins dozens of studies from grid operators,
    national laboratories, and others that have found transmission
    investment provides consumers with benefits several times greater than
    its cost. The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) has already realized
    significant benefits from recent transmission investments, with
    benefits expected to exceed costs by a factor of 3.5 over the new
    lines' first 40 years.\5\ The Midcontinent Independent System Operator
    (MISO) has also found that its Multi-Value Projects offer a benefit-to-
    cost ratio of between 2.2 and 3.4.\6\ Similarly, the National Renewable
    Energy Laboratory Interconnections (NREL) Seam study found benefit-to-
    cost ratios of between 1.8 to 2.9 for various transmission
    configurations.\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ American Council on Renewable Energy, Investment Tax Credit for
    Regionally Significant Electricity Transmission Lines, 2021. Accessed
    May 17, 2021 from https://
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    acore.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Investment-Tax-Credit-for-
    Regionally-Significant-Electricity-Transmission-Lines-ACORE.pdf#page=8.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Southwest Power Pool, The Value of Transmission, 2016. Accessed
    May 14, 2021 from https://www.spp.org/documents/35297/
    the%20value%20of%20transmission%20report.pdf.
        \6\ Midcontinent Independent System Operator, MTEP17 MVP Triennial
    Review, 2017. Accessed May 14, 2021 from
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://cdn.misoenergy.org/
    MTEP17%20MVP%20Triennial%20Review%20Report117065.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Interconnections Seam
    Study, 2020. Accessed May 14, 2021 from https://www.nrel.gov/docs/
    fy21osti/78161.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The tragic power outages in Texas and other parts of the Central
    U.S. in February of this year also underscore the importance of
    transmission to electric reliability and resilience. The ERCOT grid has
    limited ties to neighboring regions, so it was not able to import as
    much electricity as other regions when hit with natural gas supply
    interruptions, generator outages, and high demand in the face of
    extreme weather. In contrast, stronger transmission ties between the
    regions of SPP and MISO allowed those regions to weather the storm with
    less severe power outages, as they were able to import more than 15
    times as much power as ERCOT.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ American Council on Renewable Energy, Investment Tax Credit for
    Regionally Significant Electricity Transmission Lines. Accessed May 17,
    2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We respectfully submit the following policy recommendations for
    upgrading and expanding the nation's electric grid to create jobs and
    enhance reliability while deploying higher levels of renewable energy
    and protecting public health: 1) Establishing an Investment Tax Credit
    (ITC) for regionally significant transmission projects; 2) Improving
    transmission planning and cost allocation processes; 3) Resolving
    interconnection backlogs by assigning costs of network upgrades more
    equitably; 4) Providing funding and technical assistance to states,
    tribes, and localities to site transmission lines; and 5) Establishing
    a national policy on transmission.

    I.  Establish an Investment Tax Credit for Regionally Significant
    Transmission Projects

        Increased investment in transmission infrastructure expands access
    to, and delivery of, renewable energy resources. Recent studies from
    Princeton, MIT, and others have found that significant transmission
    expansion is needed to deliver the lowest-cost renewable energy to
    market in a time frame compatible with U.S. clean energy
    goals.9, 10 Despite this, necessary investments in
    transmission infrastructure do not receive the same policy support as
    generation resources.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ Princeton University, Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways,
    Infrastructure, and Impacts, 2020. Accessed May 19, 2021 from
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/img/
    Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ Brown, Patrick and Botterud, Audun, The Value of Inter-
    Regional Coordination and Transmission in Decarbonizing the US
    Electricity System, 2021. Accessed May 19, 2021 from https://
    www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
    S2542435120305572?dgcid=author.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Congress should enhance the financial viability of regionally
    significant transmission projects through enactment of an investment
    tax credit. Enactment of a transmission investment tax credit (TxTC),
    as contemplated on page 56 of the Committee's June 2020 Solving the
    Climate Crisis Majority Staff Report, would provide developers with the
    investment certainty they need through a predictable, multi-year
    investment structure, all while saving ratepayers money and lowering
    the upfront construction costs of transmission too often undervalued
    rel-
    ative to its economic development, job creation, reliability and environ
    mental benefits.
        In March 2021, President Biden called for the creation of a TxTC in
    the American Jobs Plan, urging ``the creation of a targeted investment
    tax credit that incentivizes the buildout of at least 20 gigawatts of
    high-voltage capacity power lines.'' \11\ In April 2021, Rep. Steven
    Horsford, Rep. Susie Lee and Sen. Martin Heinrich followed suit by
    reintroducing the Electric Power Infrastructure Improvement Act (H.R.
    2406/S. 1016). This legislation would promote construction of
    regionally significant projects by providing a 30% tax credit for
    investment in qualifying electric transmission, defined as any
    overhead, submarine, or underground transmission facility with a
    voltage of at least 275 kV and a transmission capacity of at least 500
    MW. The tax credit would apply to properties placed in service before
    December 31, 2031. Later that month, Sen. Ron Wyden reintroduced the
    Clean Energy for America Act (S. 1298), which includes a 30% TxTC for
    high-capacity transmission lines with a minimum voltage of 275 kV.
    Importantly, the Wyden proposal also would provide a direct pay option
    for the TxTC to ensure access by the broadest universe of stakeholders.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ The White House, Fact Sheet: The American Jobs Plan, 2021.
    Accessed May 18, 2021 from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/
    statements-releases/2021/03/31/fact-sheet-the-
    american-jobs-plan/.

    II.  Improve Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation to Build More
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regionally Significant and Interregional Projects

        FERC Order No. 1000 governs the regional and interregional
    transmission planning process for cost-allocated projects. In the ten
    years since FERC promulgated Order No. 1000, not one interregional
    transmission line has been built using the process it established. With
    more regionally significant and interregional transmission, we can
    connect centers of high renewable resources with centers of high
    electric demand, enhancing grid reliability and dramatically reducing
    carbon emissions.
        Implementation efforts too often do not incorporate projections of
    the cleaner resource mix we need to build or allow for the use of
    advanced technologies and grid optimization methods that could benefit
    the build-out of clean energy resources by increasing capacity at lower
    cost. These efforts also employ procedures that disincentivize
    transmission interconnection and ignore benefits such as lowered
    delivered energy costs through new renewable integration. Additionally,
    FERC Order No. 1000 requires interregional projects to be separately
    selected in the planning process for each RTO plus a joint RTO planning
    process. Projects which do not have clear benefits within a single RTO
    may not be selected in that RTO's planning process despite benefiting
    the nation as a whole. This is known as the ``triple hurdle'' problem
    of interregional transmission planning.
        Congress should direct FERC to revise Order No. 1000 to produce a
    more robust and efficient transmission system. This can be accomplished
    by requiring planning processes to consider the full range of benefits,
    plan for future needs, utilize more standard and broad cost allocation
    in light of regional benefits, harmonize cross-region planning
    processes and incorporate advanced technologies and grid optimization.
        Commonsense transmission planning reform was contemplated on page
    55 of the Committee's June 2020 Solving the Climate Crisis Majority
    Staff Report.
        In March 2021, Rep. Frank Pallone, Rep. Paul Tonko, and Rep. Bobby
    Rush introduced the Climate Leadership and Environmental Action for our
    Nation's (CLEAN) Future Act (H.R. 1512). Section 217 of the legislation
    directs FERC to convene a technical conference to explore, among other
    things, how transmission providers can plan for interregional
    transmission projects, how interregional transmission planning can
    facilitate the integration of renewable energy resources, and how to
    develop appropriate cost allocation methodologies for interregional
    transmission projects. The legislation also directs FERC to promulgate
    a rule addressing the issues identified in the technical conference.
        In April 2021, Rep. Sean Casten and Sen. Martin Heinrich introduced
    the Interregional Transmission Planning Improvement Act of 2021 (H.R.
    2678/S. 1015) to help bolster the Federal Energy Regulatory
    Commission's interregional transmission planning process. The
    legislation would direct FERC to consider in its rulemaking the
    effectiveness of the existing interregional planning process, specific
    improvement to the process that would meet the stated goals of Order
    1000, and cost allocation methodologies that reflect the multiple
    benefits provided by interregional solutions. The bill would also
    direct FERC to initiate the rulemaking within six months of enactment
    and complete a final rule within 18 months of enactment.

    III.  Resolve Interconnection Backlogs to Deploy More Clean Energy

        When a new clean energy generator wants to connect to a congested
    grid, they are often required to pay the full--or nearly the full--cost
    of the upgrades necessary to do so, even though many existing customers
    on the grid benefit from the upgrade. This process is analogous to the
    next car entering a crowded highway paying for the full cost of a lane
    expansion. At the end of 2019, as a result of broken interconnection
    policy, 734 gigawatts of proposed generation--90 percent of which are
    new wind, solar, and storage projects--were waiting in interconnection
    queues nationwide.\12\ These disproportionately high interconnection
    costs are forcing developers to shelve otherwise economic solar and
    wind projects. To deploy this clean energy, Congress should direct FERC
    to assign these costs to the beneficiaries of the upgrades.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, Disconnected: The Need for
    A New Generator Interconnection Policy, 2021. Accessed May 18, 2021
    from
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://cleanenergygrid.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Disconnected-
    The-Need-for-a-New-Generator-Interconnection-Policy-1.14.21.pdf.
        Page 54 of the Committee's June 2020 Solving the Climate Crisis
    Majority Staff Report recommends that Congress direct FERC to end its
    policy of assigning costs of the regional network to individual
    interconnecting generators and instead incorporate such needs into the
    regional transmission planning and cost allocation processes.

    IV.  Provide Funding and Technical Assistance to Help State, Local and
    Tribal Authorities Site Interstate Electric Transmission Lines

        In many instances, state, local and tribal governments do not have
    the resources to conduct the economic and environmental analysis
    required to site and permit interstate transmission lines that pass
    through their jurisdictions, often leading to lengthy delays. Siting
    transmission in a just and environmentally responsible manner is vital
    to building a 21st century grid. Congress can help ensure that
    critically important state, local and tribal voices are represented in
    the discussion by providing targeted assistance in the siting process.
        Page 52 of the Committee's Solving the Climate Crisis Majority
    Staff Report recommends that Congress create a new program at DOE to
    provide federal funding and technical assistance for state, local, and
    tribal authorities to conduct transmission planning and review
    applications to site proposed interstate transmission projects. It also
    recommends that Congress should authorize DOE to provide incentives for
    economic development to these state, local, and tribal jurisdictions.
        Section 218 of the CLEAN Future Act (H.R. 1512) would require DOE
    to establish a program to provide assistance to state, local, and
    tribal governments for the evaluation, permitting, and siting of
    interstate transmission lines. The legislation authorizes $75 million
    per fiscal year from 2022-2031.

    V.  Establish a National Policy on Transmission to Guide a 21st Century
    Grid

        Congress should establish a National Policy on Transmission to
    integrate carbon-free resources in a timely and cost-effective manner.
    Our national transmission system is the largest single machine in
    America, if not the largest in history. Nevertheless, there is no
    federal direction on how to make this machine work more efficiently on
    behalf of the nation. This task that has taken on all the more
    importance as we work to decarbonize the grid in a cost-effective
    manner.
        Page 53 of the Committee's Solving the Climate Crisis Majority
    Staff Report recommends that Congress should establish a ``National
    Transmission Policy'' to provide guidance to state and local officials
    and reviewing courts to clarify that it is in the public interest to
    expand transmission to facilitate a decarbonized electricity supply and
    enable greenhouse gas emissions reductions. It recommends that the
    policy statement should also encourage broad allocation of costs.
        Section 211 of the CLEAN Future Act (H.R. 1512) would establish
    that it is the policy of the United States that a modern transmission
    system should facilitate a decarbonized electricity supply to enable
    GHG emissions reductions, and that the public interest is served by
    reducing barriers to transmission investments that enable clean energy
    resources deployment.

    Conclusion

        Through this suite of commonsense policy solutions, all previously
    endorsed in the Committee's June 2020 Solving the Climate Crisis
    Majority Staff Report, we will be well prepared to modernize and expand
    our nation's electric grid to drive continued economic growth for
    decades to come while maintaining solid electric reliability and
    meeting our climate challenge. We stand ready to discuss any and all of
    these issues in greater detail at any time. Please let us know if we
    can provide any additional information by contacting Bill Parsons,
    Chief Operating Officer, at (202) 777-7596 or parsons@acore.org.

        Sincerely,

          Gregory Wetstone
          President & CEO
          American Council on Renewable Energy

                                       ++

                                      SEIA

                      Solar Energy Industries Association

    May 20, 2021

    Chairwoman Kathy Castor
    House Select Committee on Climate Crisis
    H2-359 Ford House Office Building
    Washington, DC 20515

    RE:  POWERING UP CLEAN ENERGY: INVESTMENTS TO MODERNIZE AND EXPAND THE
    ELECTRIC GRID

    Dear Chairwoman Castor,

        On behalf of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), I
    first want to thank you for your leadership on behalf of the American
    people and the aggressive work you have already undertaken during the
    beginning days of this 117th Congress to get us on a trajectory to a
    100% clean energy economy by 2050. As the House Select Committee on
    Climate Crisis discusses policy solutions at a hearing titled
    ``Powering Up Clean Energy: Investments to Modernize and Expand the
    Electric Grid,'' I wanted to give you some specific details on how the
    solar+storage industry continues to work aggressively towards your
    goals and President Biden's goal of a 100% clean energy future, which
    the nation so desperately needs and deserves.
        SEIA has set a goal of solar+storage energy comprising 20% of the
    U.S. electricity mix by 2030. We have denominated the upcoming 10 years
    as the ``Solar+ Decade'' to represent not just the immense amount of
    solar and energy storage that must be deployed for the U.S. to reach
    both the committee's goal and those stated in the Intergovernmental
    Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) goal for climate mitigation. If we
    achieve this goal, the solar industry will have generated hundreds of
    billions of dollars in investment and created hundreds of thousands of
    American jobs.
        First, we want to commend you for advancing the Transmission Siting
    Assistance Program and the Interconnection Cost Allocation Bill. These
    bills advance exactly the kind of policy needed to meet our clean
    energy future.
        As this Congress progresses towards a clean energy future,
    investment in infrastructure, particularly transmission, will be
    paramount to achieving America's path to 100% clean electricity. In its
    2021 Infrastructure report card, the American Society of Civil
    Engineers gives the U.S. a grade of ``C-'' for its energy
    infrastructure. We continue to under-invest in our grid, and that costs
    customers, both in terms of dollars paid for electricity (more
    transmission reduces congestion, allowing access to cheaper generation)
    and wages/economic output lost due to outages. Additional transmission
    investment could save customers $50 billion annually and reduce
    electricity bills by 10%.\1\ Transmission investments often provide
    benefits two to four times greater than their costs. As we transition
    to a renewable-based electric system, transmission is needed to access
    renewable resources and deliver clean solar power to customers. And we
    need to replace aging infrastructure and build new grid infrastructure
    that meets the needs of our electrifying economy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ WIRES Report: Well-Planned Electric Transmission Saves Customer
    Costs: Improved Transmission Planning is Key to the Transition to a
    Carbon-Constrained Future. The Brattle Group, Johannes Pfeifenberger
    and Judy Chang (June 2016).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Order No. 1000
    did not achieve the goals of smoother inter-regional transmission
    planning and opportunities for competitively built transmission, in
    part because it required states to commit to paying for proposed
    projects before it could be approved. Some states do not have clear
    mechanisms through which to do this, and cost-sharing between states on
    what was public purpose, what was reliability, and what was market
    efficiency were not easily resolved.
        In general, SEIA believes that competition has the dual benefits of
    lowering costs and increasing innovation. FERC, state policymakers, and
    planning regions should revisit Order No. 1000 to see if modifications
    are warranted to better attain its goals. Even better, Congress should
    provide the necessary incentives and policies necessary to encourage
    FERC, states, public utilities, and wholesale markets to drive needed
    transmission investment.
        In many areas, transmission upgrades will be needed to interconnect
    new renewable generation, a challenge which every solar and storage
    developer faces. Solar projects can often be sited relatively close to
    population centers, making interconnection and localized transmission
    critical to scaling solar deployment.
        Interconnection is the act of mechanically connecting a distributed
    generation project (solar, energy storage, wind) to the local
    distribution electric grid. Interconnection can require electrical
    improvements to existing infrastructure or require construction of
    brand-new facilities. Such upgrades range in complexity from erecting
    new poles and wires to replacing an area substation or even upgrading
    transmission equipment.
        Utilities typically charge solar developers the full cost to
    upgrade their systems to accommodate the new generation source.
    Interconnection rules define how a generation system, such as solar
    photovoltaics (PVs), can connect to the grid. In some areas of the
    United States, the interconnection process lacks consistent parameters
    and procedures for connecting to the grid or is unnecessarily complex.
    This drives up costs and causes delays, which can be significant
    barriers to project development. The ability to interconnect to the
    grid in a cost-effective and timely manner may determine whether a
    project moves forward or not.
        Beyond interconnection, the replacement of aging transmission
    assets coupled with transmission expansion to strengthen the grid and
    decrease congestion will be big drivers of new transmission investment.
    But we also need to focus on the effects of regional transmission
    planning. As of today, for SEIA's goal for solar+storage to power 20%
    of the nation's electricity needs by 2030, no wholesale market in this
    country has run a transmission planning scenario that puts solar
    generation at 20% of their anticipated load in the next decade--except
    for California. With this lack of foresight, we will always be behind
    on our transmission investments.
        Further, state renewable energy portfolio (RPS) policies vary in
    their implementation--some have higher in-state requirements, some
    allow wholesale market wide renewable energy credits, so the impact on
    transmission is a function of how the policies are designed and not
    simply the headline renewable requirement.
        There are transmission success stories. Texas's Competitive
    Renewable Energy Zone (CREZ) and MISO's Multi-Value Projects (MVPs)
    were successfully planned and have built transmission to interconnect
    expected areas of renewable energy build-out (primarily wind). However,
    these success stories are few and far between and we cannot rely on
    existing policy to deliver the investment that we will need to meet the
    climate crisis. In order to achieve deep decarbonization, we need
    policymaker commitment to transmission and solutions to cost
    allocation, along with new incentives for renewable generation.
        We have an opportunity unlike ever before to plan the transmission
    build-out for what the next 100 years will look like. Transmission
    Planners need to take into consideration the growth in renewables (20%
    or more for solar), the need for distributed solar, storage, and other
    technologies too. We must not also forget that as the transportation
    sector is further electrified, grid planners need to anticipate
    consumers using electricity to power their vehicles, both at home and
    at distinct infrastructure points like the communal charging stations
    which will take automation of building systems and greater
    electrification of the economy overall. While no one can predict the
    future with accuracy, being visionary as we approach transmission
    investment will yield better outcomes.
        Lastly, we must address the important need for energy storage. When
    combined with other technologies, energy storage systems add value to
    the total system. Distributed energy systems with energy storage extend
    grid reliability to both sides of the meter. Paired with renewable
    energy generation, the technology makes the renewable electricity
    dispatchable and able to be used with demand management systems to
    shift peak loads. Energy storage, when merged with aging
    infrastructure, improves performance, and extends the service life of
    equipment.
        Battery storage will also empower the grid in multitude of ways;
    similar to a Swiss Army knife, it can offer solutions depending on the
    need. It is important to not box storage into a category of
    transmission or generation. For utilities, energy storage can deliver
    reduced operating costs, increased renewable integration, and decreased
    dependence on fossil-fuel generation. For grid operators, storage can
    provide a more efficient balance between supply and demand, avoid
    system upgrades, and improved reliability. Commercial consumers see
    reduced electricity bills, generated revenue, and control of power
    disruptions. To the residential consumer, it provides the security of
    backup power during blackouts and the benefit of reduced electricity
    bills.
        Important legislation is being considered that, constructed
    correctly, will push us towards a decarbonized future, such as clean
    energy standard and extending the ITC. We also encourage complementary
    policy that encourages competitive markets to exist which provide
    access to more renewables and to minimize hurdles to interregional
    planning and new transmission development.
        SEIA is proud of our industry's contribution to decarbonizing the
    electricity system, but we know we still have a long way to go. Thank
    you for your consideration of these policies and continued dialogue
    with the solar and storage industry.

        Sincerely,

          Sean Gallagher
          Vice-President
          State & Regulatory Affairs

        Ms. Castor. Without objection, all members will have 10
    business days within which to submit additional written
    questions for the witnesses. And I ask our witnesses to respond
    as quickly as possible.
        I also want to thank our professional staff for a very
    good, detailed memo for this hearing. And it is available
    online on our website at climatecrisis.house.gov.
        Hopefully we will be able to work together here to hammer
    out an American Jobs Plan that will help us create jobs, reduce
    pollution, and avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis.
        With that, the hearing is adjourned. Thank you all very
    much.
        [Whereupon, at 12:12 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

                     United States House of Representatives

                     Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

                            Hearing on May 20, 2021

                          ``Powering Up Clean Energy:

            Investments to Modernize and Expand the Electric Grid''

                            Questions for the Record

                                  Linda Apsey

                               President and CEO

                               ITC Holdings Corp.

                           the honorable kathy castor
        1. Ms. Apsey, investments in transmission would benefit ratepayers
    across the country, increase reliability, create American jobs, and
    enable reductions in carbon pollution from the electricity sector.
    These widespread benefits suggest that modernizing and expanding the
    electric grid should be a goal that Americans of all political stripes
    can support. Should investing in transmission be part of bipartisan
    infrastructure legislation?

        I fully agree that investing in transmission infrastructure should
    be a bipartisan priority, and I have been pleased to note the
    bipartisan support in Congress for investment in this critical
    infrastructure. Investing in a modernized, expanded transmission grid
    offers wide-ranging benefits to communities across the nation and to
    Americans of all political stripes. Well-planned transmission
    investments can accelerate clean energy adoption, increase the
    resilience of the electric system, and create high-paying jobs in
    communities that need them most.
        As I noted in my testimony, transformative transmission investment
    cannot occur absent supportive federal, state, and regional policies.
    In recent years, Congress has made a good start at addressing this need
    by introducing legislation that would create a functional interregional
    planning process, streamline and strengthen federal siting authority,
    and provide financial incentives to large, transformative projects.
    Congress' focus on these issues has sent a strong signal to the private
    sector and helped to build consensus around the need for action. I am
    hopeful that Congress will now take the next step and seize this
    opportunity to pass legislation that supports investments in a 21st
    century electric grid that will benefit all Americans.

        2. Ms. Apsey, the February 2021 winter storm in Texas and the mid-
    continent led to the freezing of critical equipment, power outages, and
    even deaths. The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) region was able to import
    power from the PJM Interconnection, which limited power outages.
    Unfortunately, Texas could not do the same because of much smaller ties
    to the other interconnections. Experts concluded that SPP would have
    been even better off had there been more transmission between PJM and
    the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) and between the
    northern and southern parts of MISO. How can transmission lines promote
    grid reliability as climate change increases the frequency of extreme
    weather?

        As the nation's largest independent electric transmission company,
    ITC owns and operates high-voltage transmission infrastructure in
    Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma.
    These areas of the United States frequently experience blizzards,
    windstorms, flooding, and other natural disasters, and ITC has observed
    an undeniable increase the frequency and severity of these extreme
    weather events. As recent history has proven, severe weather can cause
    emergency conditions and outages, particularly in areas that do not
    have strong transmission connections with neighboring regions.
        As the nation faces increases in severe weather, transmission
    provides crucial flexibility and redundancy in the system to prevent
    outages and resulting human and economic costs. Strong transmission
    connections within and between regions allow system operators to
    leverage geographic and resource diversity when responding to extreme
    conditions. Further, transmission can reduce the amount of generation
    needed to meet capacity requirements, which reduces the probability of
    generation-related outages in isolated pockets of the system.
        The ability of transmission to enhance resilience is clear;
    however, today's transmission planning regime does not fully value the
    resilience benefits of potential projects. To enhance the ability of
    the electric system to withstand severe weather, a more proactive and
    holistic approach to regional and interregional planning is needed. As
    a first step, regions should engage with their neighbors in
    interregional planning that incorporates resilience considerations,
    which today is not required.

        3. Ms. Apsey, we have hundreds of gigawatts of wind, solar, and
    storage projects stuck in interconnection queues. I am working on
    legislation to help reduce interconnection costs and clear out these
    queues through broader cost allocation and deployment of grid-enhancing
    technologies. How would consumers benefit from clearing out the
    interconnection queues for new wind, solar, and storage projects?

        To the extent that interconnections can be accelerated, consumers
    will benefit from access to lower cost generation, cleaner air, and
    high-quality infrastructure jobs. In ITC's view, the best way to
    address queue backlogs is to adopt a ``transmission-first'' proactive
    planning approach that facilitates regional and inter-regional
    transmission build. The current practice, which focuses on incremental
    additions to the system for each new generation source, imposes
    significantly higher costs over the long-run and results in the
    backlogs we see today.
        As you correctly note, transmission cost allocation continues to be
    a major obstacle to transmission development and the interconnection
    process. In order to properly recognize beneficiaries of transmission,
    policymakers should provide supportive cost allocation mechanisms that
    consider multiple benefits and assign costs accordingly. This, along
    with a proactive regional planning process, will help to accelerate the
    queue process and provide significant benefits to consumers.

        4. Ms. Apsey, you stated in your testimony that an investment tax
    credit could support transmission expansion. According to a recently
    released report from the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE),
    an investment tax credit for transmission could spur 4,000 miles of
    high-capacity lines, capable of serving 30 gigawatts of new renewable
    energy projects. If completed, these lines and new projects would
    create over 600,000 jobs and spur $15 billion in new investment. Please
    describe the kinds of benefits you anticipate from an Investment Tax
    Credit.

        A well-designed Investment Tax Credit for transmission can offer a
    useful tool to promote large, transformative transmission projects that
    can accelerate renewable development and enhance system resilience. For
    non-regulated transmission projects (sometimes known as ``merchant''
    projects), the story is simple; an investment tax credit reduces the
    costs that must be recovered through contracted rates, making it easier
    to secure the necessary agreements and move ahead to construction.
        For regulated transmission projects, an investment tax credit can
    help to reduce the costs that customers must bear for major lines.
    This, in turn, can help to secure project approval, which is often done
    based on an accounting of costs and benefits. The tax credit can also
    make it easier to secure broad cost allocation agreements amongst
    stakeholders, which are necessary to build regional and interregional
    transmission. Further, if the tax credit is limited in duration, this
    can help encourage stakeholders to move ahead with projects faster to
    ensure they qualify for the credit within the eligibility window.
        For FERC-regulated projects, policy design is key to ensure the tax
    credit works as intended. ITC believes it is important that the credit
    is only available to those projects that need it to move forward,
    rather than available retroactively to projects which have already
    secured key approvals (and would move ahead regardless). If this is
    achieved, the tax credit can be a meaningful ``tool in the toolbox'' to
    support significant new investments in beneficial transmission
    infrastructure.
                          the honorable jared huffman
        1. In addition to more renewable energy, we want a grid that
    doesn't spark fires every time the wind blows. As someone who
    represents arid California, how will these grid modernization
    investments also address the fire-prone nature of our current grid?

        ITC's footprints are located in the Midwest, which rarely
    experiences wildfires. Instead, our region experiences severe cold,
    windstorms, flooding, and high summer temperatures. As such, I can only
    speak to ITC's experience managing resilience risks specific to our
    footprints. However, we believe the principle that grid modernization
    and expansion can enhance resilience by adding flexibility and
    redundancy to the system holds true regardless of the specific nature
    of the threat.
        In ITC's view, electric infrastructure cannot be made fully
    resilient through any single program or set of design codes. Instead,
    resilience must be pursued through a multi-faceted commitment to
    enhanced design standards, proactive system maintenance, aging
    infrastructure replacement, and long-term system planning that
    prioritizes enhanced transfer capability and critical path redundancy.
    All of these measures have a cost, which must be considered against the
    nature of the risk, hand-in-hand with regulatory authorities and key
    stakeholders.
        Given the regional differences in resilience threats, local
    transmission owners best understand the unique geographies and needs of
    their systems. In consultation with regulators and stakeholders,
    transmission owners should be afforded flexibility to pursue resilience
    measures best suited to region-specific threats.

                            Questions for the Record

                                 Donnie Colston

                          Director, Utility Department

                International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

                           the honorable kathy castor
        1. Mr. Colston, investments in transmission would benefit
    ratepayers across the country, increase reliability, create American
    jobs, and enable reductions in carbon pollution from the electricity
    sector. These widespread benefits suggest that modernizing and
    expanding the electric grid should be a goal that Americans of all
    political stripes can support. Should investing in transmission be part
    of bipartisan infrastructure legislation?

        Speaking for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
    the IBEW strongly supports the inclusion of federal investment in
    electrical transmission as part of a bipartisan infrastructure bill.
    Our electrical grid is one of the fundamental building blocks upon
    which the rest of our nation's infrastructure, investments and
    innovations rely upon. It is critical that all Americans have access to
    safe, reliable electricity upon demand. This is not simply a matter of
    the convenience of turning on your television or electronic device.
    This can be a matter of life or death for Americans who need reliable
    electrical service to keep their oxygen machines on or who need regular
    dialysis services.
        We have seen some of the unfortunate events in recent years that
    can take place when electrical service, both at the transmission and
    distribution level, becomes unreliable or when transmission lines need
    to be temporarily powered down due to the weather or when a regional
    transmission organization (RTO) or independent system operator (ISO) do
    not have enough tie-ins to neighboring electric power transmission
    systems. The IBEW believes the federal government can play an important
    role in providing the investments necessary to facility much needed
    transmission line construction that would avoid these recent blackouts,
    as well as update regulations that would help facilitate more
    privately-financed transmission construction.
        Robust federal investment in transmission would also mean
    significant work for our members. Outline line construction and
    maintenance is difficult work that needs to be undertaken by trained
    professionals. This type of work, in addition, provides the types of
    middle class, family-sustaining wages and benefits that have been
    called for by President Joe Biden and many Members of Congress as a key
    benefit of pursuing bipartisan infrastructure legislation.

        2. Mr. Colston, the February 2021 winter storm in Texas and the
    mid-continent led to the freezing of critical equipment, power outages,
    and even deaths. The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) region was able to
    import power from the PJM Interconnection, which limited power outages.
    Unfortunately, Texas could not do the same because of much smaller ties
    to the other interconnections. Experts concluded that SPP would have
    been even better off had there been more transmission between PJM and
    the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) and between the
    northern and southern parts of MISO. Would building new transmission
    lines help increase the reliability of the grid?

        Without question, building new transmission lines would help
    increase the reliability of the North American electrical grid. In
    2017, IBEW International President Lonnie R. Stephenson testified
    before the House Energy and Commerce Committee saying as such, ``We
    need a truly national grid and new transmission lines that can safely
    and reliably transfer power--including renewables like wind and solar--
    from energy rich regions to those parts of the country most in need.
    And that means we need new transmission projects that will cross
    multiple jurisdictions and state lines.'' \1\ The IBEW continues to
    hold the same stance that additional transmission lines would provide
    greater reliability. It is our sincere hope that greatly federal
    investment in electrical transmission will help avoid future
    catastrophes, such as the February 2021 Texas blackouts that impacted
    millions of Americans, including a large number of our membership in
    the state.

        3. Mr. Colston, we have hundreds of gigawatts of wind, solar, and
    storage projects stuck in interconnection queues. I am working on
    legislation to help reduce interconnection costs and clear out these
    queues through broader cost allocation and deployment of grid-enhancing
    technologies. I am also working on legislation to help develop new
    interstate transmission lines by providing technical assistance and
    incentives to state and local governments. How would consumers benefit
    from clearing out the interconnection queues for new wind, solar, and
    storage projects? Would federal technical assistance and incentives to
    state and local governments help speed up consideration of interstate
    transmission lines?

        In response to the question regarding Chair Castor's legislation to
    help develop new interstate transmission lines by providing technical
    assistance and incentives to state and local governments, my written
    testimony states the following: ``We are also supportive of the
    proposal to authorize federal funding for the Department of Energy to
    provide technical assistance for state, local and tribal authorities to
    conduct transmission planning and review applications of proposed
    transmission projects.'' Technical assistance and incentives to state,
    local and tribal governments to develop new interstate transmission
    lines would enhance the safety and reliability of the electrical grid,
    allow additional renewable and low carbon generation to be added to the
    grid, and very likely put more IBEW members to work.
        In addition, the IBEW supports efforts to accelerate the
    construction of electrical transmission lines. One of the more
    significant issues to building additional electrical transmission is
    cost allocation. In 2019, the IBEW signed onto a multi-stakeholder
    letter, including the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), the Solar Energy
    Industries Association (SEIA) and WIRES, regarding electrical
    transmission policy. Among the principles all the stakeholders agreed
    to was:

         [T]he Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of
    Energy, and state economic regulators should assess the need to improve
    upon and revise regulatory processes and corresponding regulations and
    policies governing the planning and cost allocation of high voltage
    electric transmission, balancing the public's interest in expedition,
    cost savings, care of the environment, and an equitable sharing of
    burdens.\2\

        The IBEW still stands behind these policies in regards to improving
    and revising regulatory processes for transmission planning and cost
    allocation, particularly the principle of an equitable sharing of
    burdens. As such, we hope Chair Castor's legislation will uphold the
    principle of an equitable sharing of burdens when it comes to the cost
    allocation of electrical transmission.

                                References Page

        \1\ https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/17daily/1702/
    170221_WhatIBEWandCongress.
        \2\ https://wiresgroup.com/diverse-coalition-signs-statement-of-
    principles-on-modernizing-the-electric-transmission-grid/.

                            Questions for the Record

                              Emily Sanford Fisher

                    General Counsel, Corporate Secretary and

                      Senior Vice President, Clean Energy

                           Edison Electric Institute

                           the honorable kathy castor
        1. The Select Committee's 2020 majority staff report ``Solving the
    Climate Crisis: The Congressional Action Plan for a Clean Energy
    Economy and a Healthy, Resilient, and Just America'' calls for adoption
    of clean energy standard (CES) to achieve net-zero emissions in the
    electricity sector. Portfolio standards are a proven tool for cutting
    carbon pollution: in the United States, thirty states, Washington,
    D.C., and three territories have adopted a renewable portfolio standard
    or CES. What are the critical issues that Congress must consider in
    developing a national CES? What is EEI's position on a national CES?

        The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) supports a well-designed CES as
    an important tool for reinforcing and accelerating electric companies'
    ongoing clean energy transition. As of year-end 2020, the electric
    power sector had reduced its carbon emissions 40 percent below 2005
    levels, while keeping electricity affordable and reliable for
    customers. Today, carbon emissions from the electric power sector are
    at their lowest level in more than 40 years--and they continue to fall.
        A diverse array of clean energy resources has made these reductions
    possible: 40 percent of all U.S. power generation now comes from clean,
    carbon-free sources, including nuclear energy, hydropower, wind, and
    solar energy. Accordingly, one of the most critical issues in
    developing a national CES is the continued focus on using all clean,
    carbon-free resources. A CES must recognize or credit all clean
    resources, including nuclear energy and hydropower, and must be
    flexible enough to value new and emerging technologies, like carbon
    capture and storage (CCS) and hydrogen, among others.
        In addition, as many recent studies assessing the paths to a
    carbon-free U.S. economy indicate, combined cycle and combustion
    turbines will continue to be the most cost-effective technologies to
    integrate more renewable energy reliably.\1\ These 24/7 technologies,
    which use natural gas today, can be transitioned to cleaner fuels or
    retrofitted with CCS as those options become available at scale and at
    costs that protect customers. A CES, therefore, should recognize the
    value of these technologies both today and in the future.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See, e.g., E. Larson, C. Greig, J. Jenkins, E. Mayfield, A.
    Pascale, C. Zhang, J. Drossman, R. Williams, S. Pacala, R. Socolow, EJ
    Baik, R. Birdsey, R. Duke, R. Jones, B. Haley, E. Leslie, K. Paustian,
    and A. Swan, Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure, and
    Impacts, interim report (Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, Dec. 15,
    2020) at Clean Firm Resources and Thermal Plant Retirements, pp. 177-
    199,
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/img/
    Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf.
        Other important design elements for any CES include compliance
    flexibilities, such as banking and credit trading, and other tools that
    recognize that continued increases in the amount of clean energy
    deployment are not likely to occur at an even annual pace, but instead
    in ``chunks'' as new generation is built and other generation is
    retired. Similarly, using a company-specific, multi-year average as a
    baseline can be an important design element to recognize that there is
    variability in annual reductions and that different companies and
    regions are starting at different places in the clean energy
    transition.
        Cost-containment mechanisms should be included to protect
    customers. These can include alternative compliance payments and price
    caps. Timing flexibilities also are necessary to preserve affordability
    and reliability. These tools allow companies to match compliance
    deadlines with the availability of technology, particularly new, 24/7
    clean resources, and can help address factors beyond companies'
    control, like the timeline for the development of new transmission
    necessary to interconnect new clean resources.
        The timeline for achieving 100 percent clean energy targets will
    depend on the development of new, affordable carbon-free technologies,
    which include long-duration storage; CCS; advanced renewable
    generation; advanced nuclear generation; and new fuels, such as
    hydrogen. As a CES alone may not incent sufficient research,
    development, demonstration, and deployment investments in these
    technologies in this decade, complementary policies should be part of
    any larger legislative package that includes a CES.
        Similarly, while a CES can be an important tool to support and
    accelerate the clean energy transition for the electric power sector,
    other policies will be needed to ensure economy-wide reductions. Clean
    electricity can help reduce emissions in other sectors, particularly
    the transportation and building sectors. To the extent necessary, a CES
    should recognize and support the electric power sector's role in
    helping achieve economy-wide carbon reduction goals.

        2. Ms. Fisher, investments in transmission would benefit ratepayers
    across the country, increase reliability, create American jobs, and
    enable reductions in carbon pollution from the electricity sector.
    These widespread benefits suggest that modernizing and expanding the
    electric grid should be a goal that Americans of all political stripes
    can support. Do you think it would be a missed opportunity if we did
    not invest in transmission as part of infrastructure legislation?

        EEI's member companies invest more than $120 billion each year, on
    average, to make the energy grid smarter, stronger, cleaner, more
    dynamic, and more secure. These investments help diversify the nation's
    energy mix and integrate new technologies that benefit customers. They
    also create jobs, as EEI's member companies and their workers partner
    to modernize the energy grid to better serve customers.
        Electric transmission infrastructure is the backbone of the
    nation's energy grid and is critical to facilitating the continued
    transition to clean energy. The transmission system already has enabled
    electric companies to integrate more clean energy resources and
    technologies into the grid affordably and reliably. To support the
    clean energy transition, critical electric transmission and other
    energy grid infrastructure must be built more quickly.
        In addition to investing in transmission--including supporting
    increased private investment in transmission--other complementary
    policies are needed. The way the nation plans, permits, and pays for
    transmission can present more significant obstacles to building the
    transmission we need in reasonable timeframes than a lack of
    investment. Coupling federal investment support with other policy
    changes is essential.
        In two critical areas, federal government support for continued and
    expanded investment in the energy grid could be transformative. First,
    investments to improve the resiliency of the energy grid (ensuring
    electric companies are at the center of such modernization) may be
    necessary to help some communities adapt to the changing climate and
    increased risks of natural disasters, including storms, hurricanes, and
    wildfires. Public-private partnerships, grants, and funding for state
    energy offices to address resiliency can be effective tools to support
    these investments and to leverage investments being made by EEI
    members.
        Specifically, EEI supports H.R. 2885/S. 1432, the Power On Act; S.
    704, the Disaster Safe Power Grid Act; reauthorization of the Smart
    Grid Investment Program to recognize deployment of resiliency
    technologies; and, within the CLEAN Future Act, Section 230, the 21st
    Century Power Grid Act, and Section 371, Facilities Energy Resiliency,
    which boosts funding for the Department of Energy's State Energy
    Program.
        Second, federal support for investments in electric vehicle (EV)
    charging infrastructure can spur transportation electrification. Today,
    the largest challenge facing the EV market is the charging
    infrastructure needed to support market growth, not the energy grid
    that powers that infrastructure. A report from EEI and the Institute
    for Electric Innovation predicts that, by 2030, U.S. EV sales will
    exceed 3.5 million per year and that 18.7 million passenger EVs will be
    on U.S. roads, requiring about 9.6 million charging stations.
        EEI's member companies are investing nearly $3 billion in customer
    programs and projects to deploy charging infrastructure and to
    accelerate electric transportation. Increasing investment from all
    stakeholders--including electric companies, automakers, charging
    network providers, and others--will help drive transportation
    electrification.
                         the honorable anthony gonzalez
        1. As we look to modernize the grid and secure it from cyber
    intrusions, what is the role of private communications networks?

        2. What opportunity is there to leverage utility communications
    networks and related infrastructure to help bridge the ``digital
    divide'' and deliver high-speed internet access to locations that have
    electricity but lack reliable access to broadband service?

        Electric companies long have incorporated telecommunications
    equipment and fiber technology into their operations--particularly in
    rural areas--to support their communications infrastructure and to
    provide real-time monitoring and controls for generation and
    transmission operations.
        Substantial investments in telecommunications technology are needed
    to make the energy grid smarter, stronger, cleaner, more reliable, and
    more secure. Building out electric companies' telecommunications
    network supports secure communications for mission-critical
    applications, facilitates additional smart grid tools and distributed
    energy resources, and makes the grid more resilient and more efficient.
    As regulated service providers, electric companies are well-positioned
    to help close the digital divide, as they have a physical connection to
    nearly every home and business within their service territory.
        The importance of increasing access to broadband and making it
    universally available can be compared to the electrification of the
    United States, and policymakers are looking to electric companies to
    help bridge the gap. To provide multiple benefits to customers,
    electric companies are working with the communities they serve and with
    broadband providers to forge ahead with creative new partnerships
    designed to benefit everyone.
        With the formation of partnerships, needed changes to state
    initiatives and laws, and the support of local communities, many
    electric companies are helping to bring affordable and reliable
    broadband to underserved and unserved communities, particularly as they
    upgrade the energy grid and install more fiber to support their
    critical communications network. Electric companies can install new
    fiber within their existing networks with enough capacity to support
    their needs and can lease additional capacity to others. This ability
    to install and to lease additional fiber has helped to lower broadband
    deployment costs in historically high-cost underserved and unserved
    communities.
        Under this arrangement, the electric company provides the ``middle
    mile'' infrastructure--the segment that connects a local access point
    to the major carriers and the broader internet--which the internet
    service provider (ISP) will use to build out ``last mile'' broadband
    services to homes and businesses. Installing middle mile infrastructure
    typically is cost-prohibitive for ISPs in these areas, but partnering
    with electric companies allows both entities to build needed
    infrastructure cost-effectively and to reduce costs both for
    electricity customers and new internet customers.
                            the honorable mike levin
        1. As we are all aware, the condition and operation of the grid in
    California has led to repeated catastrophic wildfires in our state. I
    wanted to touch on the role that technology can play as we seek to
    address wildfire risk. A utility in my district is working to deploy a
    solution that uses wireless broadband, smart grid technology to depower
    broken lines before they contact the ground. This is intended to
    eliminate the ability for downed lines to serve as an ignition source
    for wildfires. Ms. Fisher, do you believe widescale deployment of this
    type of solution could help protect against the sort of utility-caused
    wildfires we've experienced in California? And if so, what policy
    changes or funding recommendations would accelerate deployment of this
    and related technologies?

        Wildfires are a persistent and dangerous threat throughout much of
    the country, and they are particularly prevalent in the West. Nearly 85
    percent of wildfires are ``human-caused,'' a broad category that
    includes fires started by unattended campfires, burning debris,
    equipment use and malfunctions, improperly discarded cigarettes, and
    arson. Electrical equipment and downed power lines also can pose a
    potential fire risk, particularly when the weather is hot, dry, and
    windy.
        Wildfire behavior is unpredictable due to many variables, including
    weather conditions, terrain, and tree and vegetation species. This
    confluence of factors, coupled with changing climate conditions and
    population growth in more remote areas known as the wildland urban
    interface, is leading to more frequent, more destructive, and more
    costly wildfires.
        Given the growing threat of wildfires within their service
    territories, electric companies continue to invest in mitigation,
    detection, and response efforts to reduce wildfire risk. They also are
    focused on prevention, protection, and public-private partnerships.
        Electric companies are making significant investments to harden
    their systems and to make the energy grid more resilient. Actions
    include incorporating artificial intelligence, aerial inspections, and
    various low- and high-tech methods to mitigate potential fire risk
    caused by electrical equipment and to defend against passing wildfires.
        While it is not possible to predict definitively where and when a
    wildfire may start, it is possible to use data analytics, combined with
    increasingly accurate weather forecasts and vegetation conditions, to
    identify high-risk areas. In addition to their enhanced mitigation
    efforts, some electric companies preemptively shut off power in these
    risk-prone areas when dangerous weather conditions or high wind events
    are predicted that could impact electric equipment and power lines. In
    recent years, electric companies have made significant investments in
    the energy grid--including system segmentation, islanding, and
    microgrid deployment--that have reduced the scale and scope of these
    events.
        As noted, EEI supports the following bills, which would support
    efforts to minimize the wildfire risks that electric equipment may
    pose: H.R. 2885/S. 1432, the Power On Act; S. 704, the Disaster Safe
    Power Grid Act; reauthorization of the Smart Grid Investment Program to
    recognize deployment of resiliency technologies; and, within the CLEAN
    Future Act, Section 230, the 21st Century Power Grid Act, and Section
    371, Facilities Energy Resiliency, which boosts funding for the
    Department of Energy's State Energy Program.
        Hardening their systems against increasingly destructive weather
    conditions is a top investment priority for electric companies. Among
    their investments, electric companies are installing stronger and more
    fire-resistant poles and are placing sensors, high-definition cameras,
    and weather stations and other protective technologies in the field to
    provide real-time or near real-time information to electric company
    command centers and first responders.
        Collectively, the electric power industry has improved real-time
    situational awareness capabilities significantly. In fact, electric
    companies in the West have some of the most advanced weather tracking
    systems in the country. They also are coordinating with various federal
    agencies through the Department of Energy to establish shared
    information platforms that will allow access to mapping tools,
    satellite data, fire spread modeling, and other analytics that will
    help drive real-time decisions and actions.
        In addition to reducing the risk of fires caused by electric
    equipment, these measures help to protect equipment from being damaged
    or destroyed by wildfires and help to minimize service disruptions
    within and adjacent to fire perimeters.
        While wildfires typically are seasonal, electric companies work
    closely year-round with federal, state, local, and tribal agencies to
    help identify high-risk areas. This constant collaboration,
    coordination, and communication focuses unified attention on proactive
    mitigation measures ranging from high-tech data analysis and aerial
    inspections via drones to fuel reduction and vegetation management. The
    electric power industry also enjoys great cooperation with federal
    government partners--specifically the U.S. Forest Service; the
    Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and Interior; and the Federal
    Aviation Administration--as well as with state regulators and local
    officials.
        EEI's CEO Wildfire Task Force and the Electricity Subsector
    Coordinating Council's Wildfire Working Group, which includes investor-
    owned electric companies, electric cooperatives, and public power
    utilities, are focused on mitigation efforts, detection, and response
    as part of a comprehensive wildfire strategy. These efforts are core
    industrywide objectives for ensuring public safety.
        Electric companies--individually and through partnerships with
    federal, state, and local stakeholders--are taking extraordinary
    measures to reduce wildfire risks on their systems and are working
    closely with wildfire managers before, during, and after fires to help
    save lives and protect property. Public policies must be reformed to
    support the continued efforts by electric companies and their wildfire
    partners to mitigate wildfire risk. It is vital that policymakers:

          Pursue land management strategies that allow electric
    companies to protect power line rights-of-way (ROW) by allowing access
    and authority to conduct vegetation management and operation and
    maintenance activities within and adjacent to ROW.
          Identify and enhance partnership opportunities to assist
    in fuel reduction efforts on federal lands.
          Expand the use of drones beyond the visual line of sight
    to conduct more efficient, cost-effective, and timely inspections for
    wildfire mitigation.
          Increase investments in grant programs at the Department
    of Energy and with the national laboratories to identify available and
    emerging technologies that could prevent, detect, and mitigate wildfire
    impacts. Regulatory structures should allow the deployment of this
    technology.
          Increase investments in grant programs at the Department
    of Energy to address costs associated with wildfire risk mitigation
    efforts.
          Increase investment in infrastructure resilience and
    recovery by providing federal funding for grants and tax incentives for
    investments in wildfire mitigation technologies.

                            Questions for the Record

                                 Michael Skelly

                                Founder and CEO

                                  Grid United

                           the honorable kathy castor
        1. Mr. Skelly, you alluded to the February 2021 winter storm in
    Texas and the mid-continent in your testimony. This storm led to the
    freezing of critical equipment, power outages, and even deaths. The
    Southwest Power Pool (SPP) region was able to import power from the PJM
    Interconnection, which limited power outages. Unfortunately, Texas
    could not do the same because of much smaller ties to the other
    interconnections. Experts concluded that SPP would have been even
    better off had there been more transmission between PJM and the
    Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) and between the
    northern and southern parts of MISO. How can transmission lines promote
    grid reliability as climate change increases the frequency of extreme
    weather?

        As I stated in my testimony, no grid system covered itself in glory
    during the tragic events of February's deep freeze. It is clear,
    however, the system operators who had access to bulk power flows from
    neighboring regions were better positioned to mitigate the worst of the
    effects from the freeze. With its limited transmission ties to other
    regions, the ERCOT power system was only able to import about 800 MW
    while trying to balance its short supply and heavy demand. Its
    neighbors, SPP and MISO were able to import roughly 15 times that
    amount during the winter storm because of stronger interregional
    transmission connections.
        As climate change increases the frequency of extreme weather
    events, high-voltage transmission lines will play a critical role in
    ensuring the resilience and reliability of our power systems. Winter
    Storm Uri broadly impacted multiple regions. However, like other such
    events we have seen in the past, Uri was at its most extreme only in
    areas much smaller than the size of the Eastern and Western
    Interconnections. Strong transmission connections across regions
    allowed power to be exported from regions not experiencing stressed
    power demands to areas with the worst of the extreme weather.
        More regional transmission ties inherently create a more climate
    resistant system. Had the proposed Southern Cross transmission line
    been operational during storm Uri, its 2000 MW of capacity could have
    powered 400,000 homes within the ERCOT system. If the ERCOT region had
    multiple such ties, Uri would have been a much less harmful event--
    perhaps even mitigated entirely.

        2. Mr. Skelly, we have hundreds of gigawatts of wind, solar, and
    storage projects stuck in interconnection queues. I am working on
    legislation to help reduce interconnection costs and clear out these
    queues through broader cost allocation and deployment of grid-enhancing
    technologies. I am also working on legislation to help develop new
    interstate transmission lines by providing technical assistance and
    incentives to state and local governments. How would consumers benefit
    from clearing out the interconnection queues for new wind, solar, and
    storage projects? Would federal technical assistance and incentives to
    state and local governments help speed up consideration of interstate
    transmission lines?

        Any technical assistance that can be given to state and local
    governments to help speed along system-wide transmission planning would
    be a welcomed new development. Clearing interconnection queues across
    the country is the key to reaching ambitious de-carbonization goals.
    The wind, solar, and storage projects currently trapped in these queues
    will remain stuck absent robust policy changes in transmission
    planning. The best wind and solar capacity in the country is located in
    sparsely-populated regions with relatively modest load centers, and--
    importantly--weak existing transmission lines to tie into.
        Current transmission planning methodologies in RTOs and ISOs across
    the country place the burden of network system planning on generators.
    By more broadly cost-allocating interconnection upgrades, individual
    costs to consumers will be reduced because more low cost renewables
    will get built.
        Consumers will benefit from the clearing out of interconnection
    queues around the country through the lower cost wholesale energy
    prices of wind and solar projects relative to other forms of power
    generation. This will mean lower emissions of pollution and cleaner air
    as more fossil fuel plants are retired and replaced with clean energy.

        3. Mr. Skelly, you stated in your testimony that an investment tax
    credit could support transmission expansion. According to a recently
    released report from the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE),
    an investment tax credit for transmission could spur 4,000 miles of
    high-capacity lines, capable of serving 30 gigawatts of new renewable
    energy projects. If completed, these lines and new projects would
    create over 600,000 jobs and spur $15 billion in new investment. Please
    describe the kinds of benefits you anticipate from an Investment Tax
    Credit.

        An Investment Tax Credit (ITC) of the kind identified in the ACORE
    report would allow more projects to pass the benefit-to-cost ratio test
    by lowering the denominator of this test. If more transmission lines
    are built, we will realize lower carbon emissions, lower cost
    electricity prices as more renewables escape interconnection queues,
    and more resilient systems to extreme weather events caused by climate
    change. Not only will cost-allocated projects reap the benefits of an
    ITC, but the economics of more merchant transmission lines improve with
    a 30% ITC.
        For ``merchant'' lines that are not cost allocated, reducing the
    cost of the projects via an ITC will allow transmission developers to
    lower their transmission charges and thus more projects to get built.

                                      [all]