Oregon Policy Academy Workshop on Energy Transmission

On October 7, the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE), in partnership with the National Governors Association (NGA) and the office of Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, held a workshop to discuss potential solutions to upgrading and expanding transmission infrastructure in Oregon. This was the second convening in the Policy Academy series, following May's meeting at Wildhorse Resort, and the readout from the first retreat is available here.

The structure of the workshop involved a combination of presentations and Q&A about case studies and ideas for solutions, small group discussion with flip charts, and large group facilitated discussion. There were background materials provided to support the workshop, such as the EO 25-29 directed Proposed Framework for Strategic Transmission Siting.

The workshop participants and facilitators were asked to abide by "Chatham House Rules" whereby participants are encouraged to freely use the information and ideas they hear, but are asked to not share the identity, organization or affiliation to encourage candid dialogue and reduce power dynamics around ideas.

Workshop participants considered several values when it comes to transmission: affordability, securing reliability, preserving cultural resources, protecting natural and working lands, and fostering transparency and engagement. Several ideas for solutions surfaced, but there was not consensus on any one idea. These included:

• Ensure early consultation with Tribes on transmission projects
• Ensure there are ratepayer benefits and communicate how transmission projects affect affordability
• Establish "transmission liaison" position(s) to facilitate timely issue resolution across multiple agencies
• Establish a state-led Transmission authority to facilitate transmission development through a partnership model with independent developers and utilities, similar to other western states such as Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Washington, Wyoming and others.
• Expand Department of Land Conservation Development (DLCD) "green corridor" rules for transmission to help co-locate and reduce impacts
• Increase certainty for downstream rate recovery for early investments in transmission by utilities
• Increase permitting flexibility such that minimal route changes and micrositing - especially to support landowner requests - do not require restarting the permitting process
• Increase staffing capacity at Tribal, state, and local government agencies that have consultation and permitting requirements
• Modernize Oregon's land use goals to emphasize the need for clean energy and transmission to address climate change and grow the economy
• Prioritize transmission upgrades in existing rights of way and streamline permitting in those circumstances
• Provide clearer communication and education on need for projects
• Provide clearer communication on public input during permitting processes, including how to participate, timeline for participation, where in the process changes are possible, where in the process changes are no longer possible, and whether there are benefits that communities can gain from hosting projects (across all levels of government)
• Reform appeal pathways so that there are more consistent and predictable timelines on project permits and decisions
• Remove duplication between local, state, and federal permitting processes where possible in permitting processes (e.g., "common application")
• Seek partnerships on transmission projects where Tribes can have co-ownership or revenue sharing opportunities
• Seek changes in the Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) and county processes to allow federal, state, local permitting to proceed at the same time
• Support wildfire mitigation and non-wires alternatives while addressing wildfire liability to support investment in transmission

The readout summary that follows provides more detailed highlights and key themes from the workshop discussion.

Background

The ODOE received a technical assistance award from the NGA Center for Best Practices to assist the state in sharing information and convening policy discussions to explore ways to expedite transmission infrastructure enhancement and expansion while avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating negative impacts on energy burden, natural and working lands, Tribal cultural resources and communities.

NGA has worked with a core team (from Gov. Kotek's Office, ODOE, Oregon Public Utility Commission, Portland General Electric, and Renewable Northwest) who brought together utilities, independent transmission developers, independent power producers, Tribal representatives, local governments, advocacy organizations, and state agencies in this workshop. This technical assistance will close at the end of 2026. It will inform work pursuant to EO 25-29 and the Oregon Energy Strategy, and result in a roadmap to inform the 2027 legislative session, agency regulatory reform efforts, and electricity planning.

Welcome and Workshop Objectives

The workshop objectives were shared:

• Share solutions: Proposed Framework for Strategic Transmission Siting (EO 25-29 directive to ODOE, in coordination with GO and OPUC), reforms underway, utility and developer initiatives/project activities, legislative concepts, NGO and advocacy efforts, and more.
• Identify how solutions could work together to advance a vision of accelerating transmission expansion.
• Inform direction for "transmission roadmap" to support progress over time.

An interactive exercise that polled participants' background and experience with transmission projects helped workshop participants understand who was in the room and encouraged a mindset of seeking to understand different perspectives, which included Tribal, state government, federal government, investor-owned utility, consumer-owned utility, independent developers, advocacy/non-profit organizations and landowner perspectives. There were approximately 70 participants, and nearly all participants reported having some experience with transmission, with similar numbers across basic, moderate, and extensive experience. Participants were asked what their priorities around transmission were and (1) securing reliability, (2) affordability, and (3) fostering transparency and engagement ranked highest (in that order).

Energy landscape and transmission issues

The first panel served to set the stage on the need for transmission in Oregon and the West, and to describe current efforts. Participants heard about the Oregon and regional energy landscape, and the drivers and current efforts to expand transmission infrastructure from Western Power Pool and ODOE.

• The Western Power Pool presentation focused on the goals and preliminary results of West-wide studies developed by the Western Transmission Expansion Coalition (WestTEC) to identify regional transmission projects that provide reliability and affordability benefits and discussed the need for strong regional coordination.
• ODOE described the challenge in Oregon as one of pace, scale, and urgency, building on the Oregon Energy Strategy and regional studies. A "Four P" framework (Planning, Participation, Permitting, Paying) was introduced to help guide workshop discussions with participants to focus identification of challenges and potential solutions for deploying transmission projects. Finally, several actions already underway were summarized, including the Western Permitting Alignment and Coordination Task Force (PACT) announced by Western Governors earlier in the year.
• ODOE concluded by introducing a list of transmission projects planned to serve Oregon customers. The list of projects drew on existing, publicly available plans. The list provided participants with a short status update and key notes relating to each stage of a project's development lifecycle (Planning, Participation, Permitting, Paying).
• Western Power Pool and ODOE shared that there is strong customer demand for more energy, regardless of the use, and a need for greater transmission capacity to deliver more energy to meet rising demand. In addition, the region needs more transmission capacity to connect new resources, meet clean energy targets, and reduce congestion on the system.

Panel with Moderated Q&A: Reform Efforts and Ideas for Solutions

Participants then heard from a panel dedicated to describing current efforts underway and ideas for solutions in Oregon and Washington to advance transmission expansion and non-wires alternatives. The panel included perspectives from the OPUC, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), a Tribal representative, a county planner, the State of Washington's Department of Commerce, and ODOE.

• Key OPUC updates discussed include those under dockets: AR 687 (OPUC rulemaking regarding Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity), UE 463 and UM 2377 (implementing the POWER Act and establishing a special rate class for data center loads above 20 MW), and UM 2409 (grid enhancing technologies).
• Key BPA updates discussed include transmission planning and reforms, including the Grid Access Transformation Project (GAT) and Grid Expansion and Reinforcement Portfolio (GERP).
• The Tribal representative provided a connection between the high-voltage transmission system operated by BPA and utilities, and a Tribe's investment in distribution system upgrades to benefit the Tribal community. These measures include undergrounding lines for resilience and investing in non-wires alternatives, which were made possible with federal and state grants.
• Washington Commerce covered steps being taken to establish a transmission authority in Washington pursuant to SB 6355. Key features of Washington's transmission authority efforts include the identification of WestTEC lines as high-priority corridors, a focus on projects where state support can catalyze needed development and work to develop a Tribal consultation framework for transmission.
• ODOE summarized key elements and principles from the Proposed Framework for Strategic Transmission Siting.
• The local county perspective included a discussion of how counties permit projects, an interactive visual of many lines, resources, and energy intensive industry in the county, and history and context around the idea of expanding the "green corridor" rule in OAR 660-033-055.

Following this panel was a broader discussion of legislative concepts that workshop participants were aware of for the 2027 legislative session. These legislative concepts are in various stages of development, and workshop participants were encouraged to discuss their questions and concerns with each other during the breaks and over lunch. The legislative concepts included:

• Allowing the co-location of transmission along highway rights of way.
• Establishing a transmission authority to facilitate the development of transmission projects.
• Modernizing the state's land use goals to reflect the current energy needs of the state.

Transmission questionnaire

During lunch, participants heard a high-level overview of the results of the transmission questionnaire that NGA released in late August to gather perspectives from across Oregon. The questionnaire was designed to ground truth ideas raised in the first retreat, which was held in May. There was wide participation in the survey with over 100 respondents. The questionnaire provided valuable insights from utilities, Tribes, landowners, advocates, state agencies and other interested parties.

Overview of Completed Transmission Project Examples and Moderated Q&A

The panel after lunch presented perspectives on several transmission lines that have already been built, with a focus on lessons learned to inform future lines. Lines discussed included: Big Eddy-Knight, Boardman to Hemingway and Tillamook Oceanside. Key themes from the discussion included:

• These projects have taken a long time to develop - with Boardman to Hemingway in particular taking 20 years. The barriers those lines faced still exist today and can help inform solutions.
• A recognition that transmission projects have an impact on people and the environment. Early engagement can help inform routing, identify mitigation measures, and establish community benefits. However, routing decisions will always have tradeoffs.
• Both long, high voltage and shorter, lower voltage lines can be difficult to build. It is important to maintain venues for opposition and alternatives to be aired. It is also important to ensure that there is a point at which a line must be able to move forward once there has been an opportunity to be heard and decisions have been confirmed.
• Some ideas for reforming existing rules included allowing micro-siting without triggering new permitting requirements or having to re-file a permit. This is important to enable effective consultation with landowners, for example, and to respond to proposed small changes of a route to help minimize impact.
• Other themes raised included: setting end dates for public engagement, setting expectations around what aspects of the line were changeable or not, and better communicating project timelines. The intent is for the public's expectations to be better aligned with realities on the ground.

Broad discussion of key themes and solutions

The last part of the workshop was a broader discussion of specific ideas for solutions that had been raised throughout the day.

Transmission Liaison

• The discussion began with what a transmission 'liaison' could look like and what role they would play. Prior federal administrations and other states have had success in this type of role when the role had some authority whereby agencies responded in a timely fashion to address issues on specific priority projects.
• One question raised was how this liaison would interact with BPA, since it is outside of Oregon's jurisdiction, but another point was raised that if BPA needed a state permit, easement, or right-of-way, the liaison might be able to facilitate and support resolution of potential issues. It was noted that the liaison must also interface with federal permitting authorities (e.g., BLM, USFS, USFWS, etc.) and Tribes if there is to be true value - not just state and local.
• There were workshop participants who voiced support with several examples of value-add for projects that were getting differing interpretation of regulations as well as no response from agencies.
• There were concerns from some workshop participants that a liaison may turn into more meetings for agency staff that are already under- resourced. Relatedly, there was concern that the underlying issue is that agencies that need to review potential impacts from the project and make legally defensible decisions on permits are under-resourced.
• Salary was also brought up, in that it should be sufficient so there is low turnover in this hypothetical liaison role. In addition, a person doing this role should be competent across engineering, permitting and government so that there would be value-add in terms of understanding the underlying issues in the process and facilitating resolution between agencies.

Transmission Authority

• There was both support - but also questions and opposition - around the creation of a transmission authority or entity. The region's transmission system is constrained and it is difficult to bring projects from planning into reality; this idea seeks to address this challenge.
• Key features include the ability to support projects with revenue bonds and having the power of eminent domain, which has been used only in rare instances where a landowner could not be identified. Despite the rare use of eminent domain, it is an essential component to enabling a line to be built.
• There were some workshop participants that felt it could help with the three-legged stool of: authority to develop projects; revenue bonding; and eminent domain.
• The example of Colorado came up, because the Colorado Electric Transmission Authority can enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with developers in a way that a state agency would not be able to. Other models are the Idaho Transmission Authority, which has focused on supporting municipal and BPA projects through the use of revenue bonds, and New Mexico's Renewable Energy Transmission Authority (RETA), which has partnered successfully with independent developers.
• One observation is that the value proposition is different for BPA, COUs, incumbent utilities and independent developers. The discussion showed a need to develop a clear narrative around the unique challenges that each of these groups faces, and how various ideas for solutions, like a transmission authority, might help.
• Other workshop participants were against a state-led transmission authority. They were unclear about what problem it would solve that couldn't otherwise be solved by existing utilities or independent transmission developers. There was a suggestion that the idea should not be pursued unless it could be demonstrated that there was efficiency or benefit to ratepayers.
• There was also discussion about the benefit of a transmission authority in providing financing for projects through revenue bonds. While some workshop participants expressed a need for government support and coordination on funding for transmission, others felt this was unnecessary because funding was not an issue but rather project certainty in the permitting process was the issue.

Land use

There was a discussion of needing to better align land use with energy, including:

• Using a recent example of needing to increase housing production in Oregon, there was discussion of whether DLCD could employ similar tactics to support transmission build out.
• Updating Goal 13 (Energy Conservation) to expand the scope to renewable energy production.
• Creation of a new Goal 20 that focuses on climate change.
• It was also noted that these efforts would involve a significant undertaking by DLCD that may require resources.

Rulemaking at DLCD and EFSC

There was discussion on what could be done through rulemaking from agencies under existing authority, such as the Energy Facilities Siting Council and DLCD. Recent reports directed by EO 25-29 were referenced, but each idea was not discussed in detail at the workshop:

• DLCD's report on Accelerating Clean Energy Deployment Through Oregon's Land Use Planning Framework recommends developing rules to provide for substations to be located in Forest Zones by adding a use to OAR 660-006-0025(4), or by revising existing provisions at OAR 660-006 0025(4)(r) and recommends expanding the "Green Corridor" rule in OAR 660-033-0055 to apply statewide to facilitate and streamline transmission siting.
• ODOE's report on Siting and Permitting Large-Scale Electricity Infrastructure notes that the Contested Case phase in the EFSC process includes several steps that may be reduced or eliminated without impacting the value of that phase and recommends rulemaking to streamline or eliminate such steps. It notes that certain mandatory conditions in OAR 345 Division 25 are required to be used for all projects and there is the potential to include mandatory conditions which work in most circumstances and could minimize application submittal requirements and reduce the time associated with incomplete applications. It also notes that there are projects that require both state and federal review and a subset of the standards required for both review processes is similar enough that information requirements can be the same or similar. ODOE will evaluate these subsets of standards in order to engage applicants and federal partners early in a review to clarify the timing and submission requirements that can work for both reviews.

Communication and Engagement

There was discussion of utilities and project developers needing to better communicate and engage, including:

• Clear, consistent communication about project need and where input is meaningful in the process was reiterated.
• Tribal consultation was emphasized as a legal requirement, but that it is also a moral obligation. There were also suggestions to work with Tribes as potential project partners as many Tribes are seeking economic development opportunities.

Affordability

• There was discussion about how the addition of new transmission should be discussed as a tool to address affordability. Transmission can bring in more supply of low-cost resources that can help bring down costs.
• It was also raised that transmission is critical to increasing renewable energy generation, which, once operational, have no fuel costs subject to unstable global markets.
• In addition, there was a suggestion about framing transmission as a revenue generator, and that transmission will pay for itself by unlocking economic development.