order=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width=100%>
Yahoo! is not affiliated with the authors of this page or responsible for its content.
STATE OF VERMONT PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD Docket No. 7199 STATE OF VERMONT
PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD
Docket No. 7199
Petition of Central Vermont Public Service
Corporation for a certificate of public good,
pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248(j), authorizing
CVPS to reconfigure and make permanent a
temporary 46 kV substation bypass at the
VELCO Blissville Substation located in
Poultney, Vermont
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Order entered: 8/21/2006
I.

I
NTRODUCTION
This case involves a petition filed by Central Vermont Public Service Corporation
("CVPS") on May 26, 2006, requesting a certificate of public good under 30 V.S.A. § 248(j) to
construct a substation bypass at the Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. ("VELCO")
Blissville substation in Poultney, Vermont. Petitioners submitted prefiled testimony, proposed
findings, and a proposed order pursuant to the requirements of 30 V.S.A. § 248(j).
On June 20, 2006, the Public Service Board ("Board") issued a memorandum stating that
additional information was required before the Board could notice the proposed project pursuant
to Section 248(j). CVPS filed the required supplemental testimony on July 5, 2006.
Notice of the filing in this Docket was sent on July 14, 2006, to all entities specified in
30 V.S.A. § 248(a)(4)(c) and all other interested parties. The notice stated that any party wishing
to submit comments as to whether the petition raises a significant issue with respect to the
substantive criteria of 30 V.S.A. § 248 needed to file comments with the Board on or before
August 15, 2006. A similar notice of the filing was published in the Rutland Herald on
July 18 and July 25, 2006.
The only comment received was from the Department of Public Service, filed on Docket No. 7199
Page 2
August 15, 2006, stating that it does not believe that the petition raises a significant issue with
respect to the criteria of Section 248 and has no objection to the issuance of a certificate of public
good.
The Board has determined that the proposed construction will be of limited size and
scope and that the petition has effectively addressed the issues raised with respect to the
substantive criteria of 30 V.S.A. § 248. Consequently, we find that the procedures authorized by
Section 248(j) are sufficient to satisfy the public interest, and no hearings are required.
II.

F
INDINGS
1. The proposed project would involve reconfiguring and making permanent a temporary
substation bypass at the VELCO Blissville substation. Petition at 1.
2. CVPS constructed a two-pole bypass at the Blissville substation in 1996. The bypass
still exists, but has been disconnected from the system. Watts pf. at 1.
3. The Board approved the expansion of the Blissville substation in Public Service Board
Docket 6860. A bypass at the substation will be required to ensure continued service. However,
the alignment of the existing bypass would need to be altered to allow for the substation
expansion. The proposed project would utilize the pole structures of the existing bypass. Watts
pf. at 1; exh. DGW-1.
4. CVPS is proposing to construct a permanent bypass at the Blissville substation to ensure
that work could be performed at the substation without disrupting service to CVPS's customers.
Watts pf. at 1.
5. The proposed project would involve a bypass along the easterly and southerly sides of
the substation fence to a loadbreak switch installed next to the access road. The line would be
permanently connected with hot line connectors. The switch would normally be open and
lightning arresters would be installed on each side of the switch for protection. The proposed
project would require the installation of two pole structures at the south side of the substation
yard. Watts pf. at 1-2. Docket No. 7199
Page 3
Orderly Development of the Region
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(1)]
6. The proposed project will not unduly interfere with the orderly development of the
region, with due consideration having been given to the recommendations of the municipal and
regional planning commissions, the recommendations of municipal legislative bodies, and the
land conservation measures contained in the plan of the affected municipality. This finding is
supported by findings 7 and 8, below.
7. The proposed project would involve the installation of two transmission structures
immediately outside an existing substation yard. Upton pf. at 1-2.
8. The proposed project would not impact any land conservation measures included in the
Poultney Town Plan. The Poultney Planning Commission, the Poultney Selectboard, and the
Rutland Regional Planning Commission were provided with plans and a description of the
proposed project. None of these entities recommended changes to the proposed project. Upton
pf. at 2.
Need for Present and Future Demand for Service
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(2)]
9. The proposed project is required to meet the need for present and future demand for
service which could not otherwise be provided in a more cost-effective manner through energy
conservation programs and measures and energy efficiency and load management measures. The
proposed project consists of the construction of a short substation bypass to allow for
maintenance work on a substation without service interruptions. Watts pf. at 2.
System Stability and Reliability
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(3)]
10. The proposed project would enhance system stability and reliability. Watts pf. at 2. Docket No. 7199
Page 4
Economic Benefit to the State
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(4)]
11. The proposed project would result in an economic benefit to the state. This finding is
supported by findings 12 and 13, below.
12. The total construction costs for the proposed project is estimated at $27,450. The cost
of the proposed project would be borne by VELCO. Watts pf. at 2.
13. The proposed project would have a positive effect on Vermont utilities and customers by
improving system reliability and providing continuity of service to CVPS customers. Watts pf.
at 2-3.
Aesthetics, Historic Sites, Air and Water Purity,
the Natural Environment and Public Health and Safety
[30 V.S.A. § 248(b)(5)]
14. The modifications as proposed will not have an undue adverse effect on aesthetics,
historic sites, air and water purity, the natural environment and public health and safety. This
finding is supported by findings 15 through 34 below, which include the criteria specified in
10 V.S.A. §§ 1424(a)(d) and 6086(a)(1)-(8)(a) and (9)(k).
Outstanding Resource Waters
[10 V.S.A. § 1424(a)(d)]
15. The proposed project is not located on or near any outstanding resource waters. CVPS
consulted with the Agency of Natural Resources and the Department of Public Service regarding
whether the proposed project has the potential to impact a highly significant body of water.
Neither entity believed that the proposed project has the potential to impact a highly significant
water body. Upton pf. at 7. Docket No. 7199
Page 5
Water and Air Pollution
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)]
16. The proposed project would not involve excessive dust or odors during construction.
Construction will take place only during daylight hours, and the nearest residence is located over
1,000 feet from the substation. Earth disturbance will be limited to new pole locations. Upton
pf. at 3.
Headwaters
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(A)]
17. The proposed project is not located in a headwaters area. Upton pf. at 3.
Waste Disposal
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(B)]
18. The proposed project will meet applicable health and environmental conservation
department regulations regarding the disposal of waste. The proposed project does not involve
injection of any material into ground water or wells. Unused and retired materials will be reused,
recycled or disposed of in accordance with the rules of the Vermont Waste Management
Division. Upton pf. at 3.
Water Conservation
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(C)]
19. The proposed project will not involve the use of water. Upton pf. at 3.
Floodways, Streams, and Shorelines
[10 V.S.A. §§ 6086(a)(1)(D)(E) &(F)]
20. The proposed project is not located in a floodway or located near a stream or shoreline.
Upton pf. at 3-4. Docket No. 7199
Page 6
Wetlands
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)(G)]
21. The proposed project would not violate the rules of the Water Resources Board relating
to significant wetlands. This finding is supported by findings 22 and 23, below.
22. A Class II wetland is located to the west of the proposed project. The proposed project
would involve the placement of one pole structure in the wetland buffer, directly adjacent to the
substation access road. There would be no significant impact on the wetland or wetland
vegetation. Upton pf. at 4.
23. The Vermont Wetlands Office has determined that the placement of the pole structure in
the wetland buffer is an allowed use under the Vermont Wetland Rules. Upton pf. at 4.
Sufficiency of Water and Burden on Existing Water Supply
[10 V.S.A. §§ 6086(a)(2)&(3)]
24. The proposed project would not require a water supply. Upton pf. at 5.
Soil Erosion
[10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(4)]
25. The proposed project would not cause unreasonable soil erosion or reduction in the
capacity of the land to hold water so that dangerous or unhealthy conditions may result. Soil
disturbance would be limited to the installation