Today's Paper Latest Elections Coronavirus 🔵 Covid Classroom Cooking Families Core values Story ideas iPad Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles Archive
ADVERTISEMENT

WASHINGTON -- All six members of Arkansas' congressional delegation urged Energy Secretary Rick Perry on Tuesday to "protect state sovereignty" and defend "states' rights" by blocking construction of an energy transmission line proposed to cut across Arkansas.

In a letter, the six Republicans urged the former Texas governor to help them fight Clean Line Energy Partners' $2 billion project, which would carry electricity from Oklahoma wind farms to consumers in the southeastern United States.

U.S. Sens. John Boozman of Rogers and Tom Cotton of Dardanelle, and U.S. Reps. Rick Crawford of Jonesboro, French Hill of Little Rock, Steve Womack of Rogers and Bruce Westerman of Hot Springs wrote to Perry a day after they introduced legislation that would give states and American Indian tribes the power to derail these types of projects.

If it passed, Arkansas' governor and the head of its Public Service Commission would have to explicitly authorize the use of eminent domain before it could be used against landowners.

Decisions about the placement of transmission lines have traditionally been made by states, the lawmakers said.

The Plains and Eastern Clean Line project would span more than 700 miles, entering Arkansas just north of Van Buren and exiting the state south of Wilson in Mississippi County if the preferred route is adopted.

It would carry 4,000 megawatts, enough power to supply 1 million homes, supporters say. A converter station in Pope County would enable up to 500 megawatts of the power to be delivered to Arkansas customers, the company added.

Arkansas government officials and many landowners along the path have opposed construction of the project, saying it would be an eyesore, lower property values, endanger migratory waterfowl and force landowners to sell property against their will.

Supporters say it would create jobs, reduce carbon emissions and diversify the nation's energy supply.

In their letter to Perry, the lawmakers say they don't object to renewable energy or improvements to the nation's electric grid.

"Instead, our objections relate to the vast overreach the Obama Administration employed, allowing this project to skip the necessary protections which exist to protect state sovereignty and private property rights," they wrote.

Under Section 1222 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the secretary of energy can own, operate, build or collaborate on construction of a transmission facility that is needed "to accommodate an actual or projected increase in demand for electric transmission capacity."

The project must be in the national interest, "reduce congestion of electric transmission in interstate commerce" and not interfere with the "efficient and reliable operation of the transmission grid."

A year ago, then-Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz gave his backing to the Clean Line project, saying it would help modernize the nation's power grid and facilitate the use of renewable energy.

After the letter was released, Clean Line Energy Partners expressed confidence in the Energy Department's decision-making process, noting that the agency had spent nearly six years on the process. Clean Line said the 2005 Energy Policy Act had been signed into law by President George W. Bush after receiving bipartisan support.

The company remains committed to the project, its executive vice president, Mario Hurtado, said in a written statement.

"Since receiving approval from [the U.S. Department of Energy] in 2016, large field crews have been mobilized in Arkansas to prepare the project for construction, Arkansas manufacturers are testing equipment and planning for production next year; and a new factory will open in West Memphis next month that will put Arkansans to work manufacturing critical equipment for the project," he said. "The Plains & Eastern Clean Line is good for Arkansas workers and Arkansas consumers."

Metro on 03/08/2017

Print Headline: State's six ask Perry to block power line

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsor Content

Archived Comments

  • 2thepoint
    March 8, 2017 at 12:37 p.m.

    Arkansas Online, please give us more in depth news when you print articles about the Clean Line Direct Current Transmission line. This is a project that is ripe with falsehoods. This is a for profit company that is owned by one of the wealthiest families in the US. They have been turned down by our state and our landowners and now they are appealing to the federal government to take our private land by eminent domain, entirely for their own financial enrichment. They have no takers for their wind power generated direct current. Wind power not even built yet and that goes to nowhere, no major contracts. We are very thankful to our Arkansas Senators and Representatives who are standing up for Arkansas landowner's rights.

  • JMort69
    March 8, 2017 at 3:54 p.m.

    Clean Line has had nothing new to say about this project for over 5 years. They have no customers, no contracts and no financing. Per the DOE's Participation Agreement, all of these pre-conditions, along with others, must be met BEFORE the DOE will participate in the project. This is a fact that most articles, including this one, fail to mention. Clean Line does not have the right of eminent domain, and, if the DOE doesn't participate, they never will. As for the jobs it will create, according to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, there will about 100 direct, temporary jobs for Arkansas and maybe 27 permanent ones, for which Arkansas landowners will sacrifice 8,000 acres. From what we are hearing, they have laid off land agents from Arkansas because they weren't meeting quotas, and have hired ones from other states. I guess they think agents from Pennsylvania will force us poor, ignorant Arkies into contracts that the locals couldn't. Are they in for a surprise. Clean Line knows they have no guarantee that the DOE will participate at this point, so any money they are spending is a business risk they are choosing to take. Originally, Clean line planned 5 of these projects. Two never got off the ground, they have pulled their project in Iowa on the Rock Island line, they lost in the Illinois appellate court on the same line and are now appealing to the Illinois Supreme Court. The Grain Belt Express is also being litigated in Illinois and the portion in Missouri is hung up in their PSC. There is a federal court case pending in Arkansas about the Plains and Eastern project that could delay it indefinitely or end it all together. Clean Line is using Arkansas as a guinea pig under a law that has never been used before. They are side-stepping our state's approval method and ignoring our state's rights. They are threatening the livelihood of farmers and the peaceable enjoyment of properties that have been in families for generations, all for a project with no customers. If there were a need for this project, someone would be buying their product, but they are not. As our legislators stated in their letter to Secretary Perry, we are not opposed to alternative energy. Arkansas has already integrated a portion into our mix. We do, however, object to the federal overreach this project represents and the taking of property solely for the benefit of a for-profit corporation with absolutely no benefit to the people of our state. We are grateful to our legislators at both the federal and state level for listening to the thousands of voices in Arkansas that oppose this totally unnecessary project.

  • steve2765
    March 9, 2017 at 1:51 p.m.

    Terrible mistake. Wind farms in Texas are providing good, high paying jobs in rural America. And the lease payments to landowners are keeping farmers on their land. Last year wind farms paid out $222 million to landowners, mostly rural.

    Wind farms follow power lines, it's good for Arkansas, and it's good for the upstream states who have an abundance of wind, but not means to get it to market.

  • 3WorldState1
    March 9, 2017 at 2:51 p.m.

    Jmort, explain how this is different than the XL Pipeline? It is my understanding, the XL Pipeline (owned by a private company) was given the authority of eminent domain to take Americans land to build the pipeline. And we don't even get first rights to buy the oil. As well as many other discouraging issues with the XL.
    And all six of our legislatures approve of XL.
    Please explain the difference. For I do not know.
    Thank you in advance.

  • BirdDogsRock
    March 9, 2017 at 3:50 p.m.

    3WS, thank you for making this point. Politicians get on their high horse to support energy transmission facilities that cross other states' land, but get on their other high horse to protest against transmission facilities that cross their own state. This is just blatantly silly by Arkansas' delegation.

  • JMort69
    March 9, 2017 at 7:19 p.m.

    There are major differences between this project and the XL pipeline. The first being, that the law by which the government participation in the Clean Line project is being built has never been used before and, per the pending lawsuit in Arkansas, has not been used as set out within the language of the law itself. The next being, this project has no customers. The XL pipeline is being built due to customer demand. I have been a right-of-way agent for 36 years. I have worked on electrical transmission line projects. But, I have never worked on one that was built on pure speculation, which is all Clean line has. Every line on which I have worked has had actual customers prior to being built. As for the right of eminent domain, the DOE reserved that right unto themselves in the "Participation Agreement" between the government and Clean Line. As far as I know, the government is not going to assist the XL pipeline in condemning private property. In this case, landowners will lose their property for a project with no customers, and the federal government will do the taking on behalf of Clean Line. I have worked on interstate pipeline projects that were granted the right of federal eminent domain. Never once did any government agency assists in the process nor did they pay for any litigation. And, for those who don't know, we are not talking about a wind farm here. We are talking about a 200 foot wide swath, encumbering 8,000 acres being cut across our beautiful state, (which is not, by the way, the barren flatlands of West Texas or Oklahoma), 200 foot high steel towers larger than any in Arkansas and blasting into solid rock for a 25 foot deep foundation for the towers. Hardly a wind farm. Under the Participation Agreement, the DOE will not participate until numerous pre-conditions are met, none of which Clean Line has met, to date. If this project were necessary, there would probably not be the immense opposition that exists. But, no one has signed on to buy anything Clean Line is going to transmit. They have begged the TVA, the Southern Company and many other major players in the utility industry for five years and not one has bought a single megawatt of transmission capacity from Clean Line. And yet, landowners are expected to sacrifice lands held in families for years because the federal government has chosen to enter into this unholy matrimony with a private, for-profit company, some of whose executives previously worked for the DOE and helped write the law being used against Arkansans. But, all of this is moot now. The matter is in the hands of the courts and the current DOE secretary. I hope they see the undue burden the project is placing on landowners. It is our voices to which our congressmen are responding, and we the people are due a voice when our government oversteps its boundaries as egregiously as they have in this project.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT