 You know taking the young person's route you know, I'm going to read my spiel right up my phone As long as I don't delete it Him I said I think we're set to go back and definitely hear myself Thank you all for coming very much. My name is Tony Donovan. I am here Well, we're all here tonight For an informational form on a central main power company's application for the New England clean energy connect transmission line From Quebec through Maine to Massachusetts. My name is Tony Donovan I am currently a chair person of the Sierra Club main executive committee Sierra Club main is one of 64 chapters of the Sierra Club nationwide and as with all Sierra Club chapters We are an entirely volunteer grassroots environmental advocacy group The Sierra Club is the largest and oldest environmental advocacy organization in North America and in Maine We have 5,800 members and over 14,000 supporters and Tonight we're here for those supporters. We are here hosting this moderated forum to provide as much information as we can For our members for people for groups to try to be able to make informed decisions on what is certainly a very important energy project I want to extend my thanks to the our thanks here club thanks to the panelists particularly the folks here from central main power With the understanding that they accept that our invitation to this event That is specific to learning from all sides. We're not dominating it from any one side It's a side of get some good questions on a table and some good answers and non answers and we'll move on to find them So with that side I asked for and I'm certain we're gonna get this a good main crowd proper meeting decorum and stability is requested well, so I'm going to introduce our guests tonight and I'll start with CMP and then I'll tell you a little bit about what the process is thorn Dickinson vice president business development for oven grid Mr. Jerry Marabelli Marabelli environmental programs of projects center main power Bruce Phillips is director for the Northbridge group. Who's here with some to main power? And we have interested parties or individuals representing interveners if they're not actually interveners Sue Eli climate and clean energy policy advocate and staff attorney for the Natural Resources Council of Maine Link Jeffers director of economic and community development city of Lewiston Jeremy Payne is the executive director of the Maine Renewable Energy Association and David public cover his senior staff scientists with the Appalachian Mountain Club. So thank you all for joining us tonight Okay, we're gonna Thank you. The so okay. We'll have some to make powers gonna do about a 20 minute We're trying to limit our do our best on time watch my clock 20 minutes for a presentation And then I'm gonna assume that there'll be some pressing questions But so we'll go open up to a couple questions when they're done keeping in mind They're gonna open the whole thing up to questions and answers after everyone's done speaking But if you really want to ask CMP something about their presentation, you know, please I'll recognize you I'm gonna try to keep it fair and balanced after the 20 minute presentation and cue whatever Q&A that goes on Then each one of the interested parties will do three to five minutes I'm gonna try to limit the 20 minutes, and then we'll open it up to full questions and answers And then although I think I might have just lost my script I should be have this off the top of my head because in keeping with full disclosure Sierra Club National Organization of which the main chapter is a part of is opposed to this project So our opposition is based on our opposition to Hydro, Quebec and mega dams as not being clean energy We can elaborate on this during the Q&A if you like Or you can contact us later But we are here for a good understanding of what this transmission line is like most of you So there we go, and let's get started. I think I'll turn it right over Should we do introductions or just John I point to Johnny's an old friend and John and I go way back We're Islanders by the way, and John Carol's probably gonna do a little presentation or you're the touch guy This is John Carol so for anyway, so I'm really excited to be here, too I love this idea of the format and I want to thank doc Kelly for coming up to me and actually during during one of our Sessions at the Commission To have this idea and I think it's really exciting I think sometimes when we're in that litigated setting or we're writing pieces or You know, sometimes it's harder to find common ground And I think these are great opportunities to have this kind of a dialogue and answer questions I think the the challenge that We we I think we're all dealing with and I think that the nice thing here is I think everybody that most likely is here Is an agreement that climate change is a threat that we have to wrestle with and particularly if you believe it's an existential threat that action has to be taken on it now and as far as As far as New England and in Maine It's not the only challenge we we to try to move to a Decarbonized future where we move our electric supply to a decarbonized side We we have other balancing factors that we have to do is so not only about reducing co2 But we're also looking at stabilizing prices and ensuring reliable supplies I think many people that have lived in Maine for a number of years can remember particularly the winter of 2013 and 14 where there wasn't enough gas supply to reach New England New England paid three billion dollars extra that winter Maine itself paid over 300 million So how do you balance all of these various issues? How do you deal with that challenge? While still moving towards a decarbonized future. So I'm I'm going to kick it over to Bruce Phillips Then I'm going to come back and talk a little bit about our project Jerry is going to talk a little bit about the environmental and permitting and then I'll wrap it up. So Bruce Phillips has been in the electric industry for over 30 years specializing in Policy and economics and particularly in the last 10 years He's focused on climate change issues Including work that he did at the Obama administration on cap and trade and clean power so I think the That idea that perspective on more of a strategic and policy ways. I think there's a great way to kick it off Okay, can everybody hear me? All right Thank you, Thorin and thank you dot and in the Sierra Club for hosting this Looking forward to the discussion here when when the panels is done So so to start with you know as Thorin said I'm going to talk a little bit about the policy context for For this project and the idea of bringing Canadian hydro into into New England And the policy context for that is the climate challenge and I'm going to talk a little bit about just what what that means and How difficult the challenge it is it is to? Surmount But but let me say because it's a large challenge It's certainly very reasonable for for all of us to be talking about what the best way to do that is Or what the best combination of ways to do that and certainly This project and bring Canadian hydro into Massachusetts is is part of one approach to to addressing the climate challenge Certainly, it's not the only one. There are many people around the country and maybe in this room that that have the view that The way we ought to be addressing the climate challenge is by decarbonizing the electric system exclusively with renewable energy technologies, but without any sort of new reservoir hydro and I'm going to talk and most of my focus here today will be on on that pathway really trying to Explain to you some of my concerns about it and and why In my view that may not be a fully practical or assured way to achieve the policy goals of Decarbonizing the power sector here in the next the next several decades So there's two particular pieces of that two versions of this a hundred percent renewables no hydro Approach that I'm going to examine in turn One is relying solely on on solar energy wind energy and and battery storage technologies just by themselves And the other is to rely on those technologies plus another complement of other kinds of renewable technologies and supporting technologies But ones that still exclude reservoir hydro, and I'm going to talk through some some issues associated with all of those As a counterpoint to an alternative approach that would involve importing Canadian hydro in the United States Thank you So first before sort of diving in into into some of this a few a few points So what does it mean to address climate change? And what do we mean by decarbonization and the specific goal that? Policy makers have taken and I think is part of the policy Across the New England region as context for this project and those of us that are policy analysts working on this Deep decarbonization means eliminating carbon emissions from the global economy By roughly mid-century So this you know in contrast to the Obama clean power plan that sought to reduce electric sector power emissions by about 30% The true goal is to eliminate it to fully take it down to zero and do that by mid-century And so what what the global climate modelers tell us is that means by 2060 to zero out global emissions Almost everybody sees the electric sector is being having to do first because it's the cheapest and fastest way to do that so that means eliminating all carbon emissions from the power sector in roughly 30 years I'll just say that that's that's that's a challenge It has never been done before in the history of human kind So it's it's it's it's extremely difficult challenge a few sort of data points for context here in New England What this means is that at a minimum we have to replace about 42% of the electric generation in the region that's currently supplied by natural gas and in oil 68% if we're also going to replace all the nuclear generation in the region 97% if we're actually going to do it all with solar and wind and battery storage And so it's it's a tremendous investment That has to happen and and has to happen very rapidly So as I mentioned roughly mid-century means night 2050 2060 the electric sector by 2050 And and what the energy historians tell us is that in the history of humankind We've only gone through two other grand technology transformations One is from wood to coal and the other is from coal to oil and gas And you can argue since we're still using a lot of coal We haven't really gone through any Transition fully but each of those transitions takes 50 to 75 years and what we're trying to do here Is we're trying to compress that into a 30 year time period So among other things with this means is that we only have one chance to get this right If we had 200 years to address the climate problem We could take the next 30 or 40 years try something see if it worked And if it didn't that's okay because you still they have another hundred and fifty years to sort of figure out what plan B Is plan C is that's not the situation. We're in today You know, we really only have one chance And so we have to make sure that not only that we're undertaking technology paths that are possible But that they are reasonably likely or assured to actually achieve what what they're intended to do so next slide So I mentioned I'm going to sort of talk about two parts of this Next some of these slides are pretty dense and technical I'm going to skip over them pretty quickly, but I'm happy to talk about them further later today or another time If I gloss over some points or raise issues that aren't addressed here So I'm going to present some data that is taken from how the electric system in New England operated in in 2017 just last year This is sort of daily and hourly and weekly data over the course of last year And I've selected a couple couple weeks to look at in detail The analysis is done over the entire year happy to share the entire analysis, but to make these points I'm just going to focus on a couple of these representative weeks once in the winter and once it once in the summer So this is what this is what these weeks look like in these charts If you look at the yellow line at the bottom, that's the amount of solar energy that we produced in in in New England In this time and you can see in the top chart that there's a peak every day of the week There's some solar output every day of the week. We have the first day the third day The fifth and six days, you know, we're pretty good solar days a couple of the other days less so So some days are sunny some days are cloudy not not that surprising The heavy green line, which is easiest to see at the top chart is the sum of the wind and the solar output And so you can see how that sort of peaks up and down as you would expect consistent with the solar output But there's a couple days at the beginning of the week Which are which are both pretty quiet from a wind perspective and also kind of cloudy. So it's it's variable Across the week. We have a similar pattern down below in the lower chart And then the difference between the two charts that's notable that comes across here is that the wind resource is much stronger In the winter than in the summer. So the lines are there are much much much higher on the top chart than the lower chart next slide This point this this chart simply puts that same data in the context of electric load To make the point and remind all of us that solar and wind today only comprise three to four percent of electric generation in the region Despite how fast they've been grown next chart This one's a little complicated, but but I'm going to try to simplify it a little bit So what we've done here is we've taken the solar and wind daily output from last year and we've expanded it So it produces the total number of megawatt hours equal to the electric load That New England had last year and we want to see whether Whether whether the solar and wind output matches with with the electric load That is how what portion of the year are we producing enough power to satisfy electric load? So in the top chart that black line running through the middle is electric load The top line there is is the sum of the solar and wind Growsed up 35 times more or less to equal the total amount of output over the course of the entire year The green or turquoise shaded area up top is the hours in which we have surplus generation And you see we don't actually have surplus generation every year every hour during this week There's a couple days early on where we have deficits more importantly if you look at the chart at the bottom the tanned area Is an extended period during the week when we do not have enough electric generation out of the solar and wind to satisfy load Even though we have enough over the course of the entire year The variability of the resources such that we don't have enough to satisfy it every every week or every every day of This of this season so we have these this mismatch and just to make sure you understand I didn't cherry-pick these weeks to sort of find two that don't match pretty well. Let's go to the next chart This shows the equivalent output over the course of the entire year and what you see here is that? Beginning in the winter and extending into the spring we have extended periods of surplus energy This is when we have enough to meet load, but we're producing a lot of electricity that has no economic value So it's wasted energy We see this again in the fall that comes up and in the but in the summer we have the real problem and that's where We don't have enough output out of the solar and wind Capacity to meet the electric load And so this pattern of surpluses in the winter and and deficits in the summer is not unique to you New England We see this in every state in region of the lower continental 48 states With the possible exception of California and that's because it has a stronger summer summer wind resource than winter So we have this problem And then if we skip forward here next slide I will say that every serious climate policy analyst that I've talked to in the papers I've read in across in the literature on this Acknowledges this problem that we could we literally cannot solve this problem with solar and wind and battery storage It's an impractical solution. So what do we look to next? Well, we look to coupling those technologies with other kinds of renewable technologies and supporting technologies That can help us address the seasonal mismatch issue and this list of nine technologies here is from probably the most Well-recognized or most prominent analysis that's been done of this problem to solve that the seasonal and this So it calls for onshore wind offshore wind solar PV concentrated solar power with storage battery storage pump hydro thermal energy storage a nationwide high voltage transmission system And customer demand response in customer demand response is a euphemism both for sort of shifting Customer demand from one hour to a next as might be done with electric vehicles It's also covers curtailment, you know It's curtailing electric load when it's not available to meet the industrial load or commercial load or residential load And what's important about this list is not the particularly technologies here. It's that there's nine items on it We're not talking about three or four or five technologies here We're talking about nine and the other thing that's important about it is that we need all nine of them you take out any one of these and the whole system kind of falls apart and So but if you asked me today on a piece of paper, can we create a situation where? Those nine technologies could satisfy load. I think the answer is yes You know, so the answer here is not whether it's possible to do this The real question should be is it likely isn't it assured because remember we only have one chance to do this We can't try one path have it fail and then take another 50 years to sort of find another solution next slide So a few points here about why there's uncertainty associated with this. I'm not going to sort of deal with these in In any detail, but let me just sort of tick through them to give you a little bit of flavor Can we build out the wind and solar technologies? Can we scale it up 35 fold across the region to produce all the megawatt hours we need? That's one question Can we produce a much larger nationwide high voltage transmission network? Given the cost of doing that the institutional challenge the public reaction. That's another question A third question is can we can we invent and commercialize the multi-week and seasonal storage technologies? That we need to move surplus energy from the winter to the summer Fourth can we do the demand management and load curtailment program curtailing electric load for customers? Will customers be willing to have their electric loads managed in that way will they be happy with that or not? And finally, can we do all of that in achieve zero emissions at a cost? That cut great ratepayers are willing to pay for in the real world And so there's all questions and in theory we might be able to address all of them and But what this next slide does is that it puts those questions into a risk framework And if you recall what I said is that we had to have all nine of those technologies to achieve this kind of outcome This figure arranges those five questions In that same kind of format and and what's important about about this chart is the basic observation is that If we had if we could answer With a hundred percent certainty that we could Achieve all five of those questions the answer all five of those questions in the affirmative then we would know that we could affirmatively Decarbonize the power sector But if you start to move back from a hundred percent probability to some lower level Then the cumulative probability of getting the outcome is a product of all five And so in this particular little mathematical example if you assume we have a 90 percent chance of Being able to answer all five of those questions affirmatively Then we have a 59 percent chance of Success and when I show this to other climate policy analysts they kind of Smirk and laugh and and then they say 59 percent is way too high You know under the best of circumstances it might be 50 percent. It might be a coin flip whether that path is feasible or not Next slide So so what do we do about that? I think the solution is to is to add other technology options to the mix and With this slide illustrates is that if we have three other technology paths that we can use Not instead of solar and wind and batteries But in addition to solar and wind and batteries the probability of this little exercise goes up dramatically And with three other alternatives in this exercise the chances of success goes from 59 percent to 95 percent so You know it kind of argues for resource this argues for resource diversity and pursuing all of the zero carbon technology options that we have So just just in closing a few few quick takeaways The seasonal mismatch that I illustrated in the first part of this this set of slides is a serious problem Because of that the solar and wind and battery storage approach is not a practical solution by itself I think most serious climate policy analysts would agree with that We can address the seasonal mismatch by coupling solar and wind and battery Technologies with with other zero carbon technology options as well But if we do that with a limited limited scope like the nine technologies I listed earlier The probabilities of success are pretty low They're certainly not as high as they should be and we can do better than that And we can do better than that by folding in other zero carbon technology options And because of that the last bullet here is that a more practical and assured way to achieve the climate policy goals Is to decarbonize with a broad range of technologies including what we have available to us here in New England Canadian hydro reservoir hydro So let me stop there. Yeah, well, thank you Bruce I was gonna we do have other slides, but I think to honor the time of that we have here There are maybe I could just if I could ask the patients for one minute We'll go right to the maybe to the last slide that we have There was other information in the deck about how we laid out the project some of the mitigation things that we have Some visuals around the transmission line that you can look oh go ahead Okay Thank you. I personally got a good snapshot of what you were saying there And I do understand there's a little bit more to add But let's see if we can get some questions and information out on the table and get to and share with you What else you have I did punch another minute up there, but what's that I did punch another minute up there for you But oh 34 seconds with my interruptions. So well that go ahead So what I think what I want to make sure that we're acting in good faith That was the idea here of the of the thing I I sense that should we do the these few slides and and then go Go out or should how do we want to do that? I don't want to look to me Okay, all right. Well, why don't we do this We'll do an abbreviated quick version of it so we make sure we hit all the key points and then the whole team is available afterwards if you have more questions are obviously of Questions come up during the process. So As I as I kicked off at the beginning the challenges that we have as both New England and Maine and really globally Are around not only reducing greenhouse gases, but stabilizing prices and and dealing with supply of Reliability supply Massachusetts me at Massachusetts took a leader position position by passing legislation to Have a request for proposal to propose projects 51 were submitted into them around reduction of greenhouse gases Obviously, I think for most people that are following it very closely northern past was initially selected their their Permitting process failed in New Hampshire, and we were the the second place out of the 51 that moved forward to the top Let's go ahead So the I think the thing that we we like to talk about is how we the philosophy about how we laid out the project You'll see this is a map that we also have outside of the 189 miles of the quarter 72 percent of it is parallel to an existing line If you look at the map outside, you'll actually see the blue line from Lewiston just short of the forks That is the part of the line that's parallel to the existing quarter and the new quarter is from the forks area West to the Quebec border and how we tried to think about that was number one to Identify the most sensitive areas from conservation easements and areas that we knew had a large visual impacts and And try to find a corridor through that in addition We tried to find land that was similar utilization as a transmission line would be and as Jerry will talk a little bit about that the two Largest landowners are here are logging companies and that's an area west of the forks. That's heavily logged Okay, so this shows in Brown the large land parcels and you know the preference would be a straight line But we took many Jogs around different sensitive resources and the large land parcels allow us to do that because we can work with one landowner rather than having to talk to a number of different parties and The white circles you see identify water bodies wetlands Elevation that elevated areas around route 201, which is a scenic byway vernal pools Conservation lands which is are the the green and then also the Kennebec River in the Appalachian Trail And the idea here is that we did natural resource surveys before we cited the the Project and made a point of avoiding them. There were many other diversions on a smaller scale at a micro scale This just shows examples of each type of diversion This is what rafter might see heading downstream from Harris Dam as it approaches the River crossing the river crossing the aerial crossing proposes about eight miles south of Harris Dam It's not in the gorge proper the gorge actually extends only about three and a half miles below Harris Dam In this area where the river flow is typically around six miles per hour or so you'd see it for about two and a half minutes Leading to it from upstream and if a person turned around in a raft, they'd see it for another five minutes or so looking upstream and in this area we've done a few things to Minimize its impact one of which is to go to a three pole design so that the wires are higher over the river We've gone to non-specular conductors which reflect less light so they blend more into the skyline and We've used self-weathering steel which is is color-wise and a bit more compatible with the woods because it looks kind of brown and rusty This shows where the Appalachian trail crosses the corridor in three different locations The there is an alternative to cross it only once and the trail national park services had the option to Modify the trail crossing and to reduce it from three to one to this point in time. They haven't done that We're working with them now to look at options for eliminating those first two crossings in the upper left of the Aerial and reducing it to one to minimize the impact on hikers And then this is a snapshot of the environmental impacts of the project and the compensation that we've offered as part of our compensation plan to the Army Corps of Engineers and Maine DDP and Excuse me. What you'll see is that It breaks it out into some broad categories temporary wetland fill Which is really a protective measure to protect wetlands as we traverse them with construction equipment. Those are crane mats different conversions of cover types so forested wetlands 156 acres Total land conversion of about 200 acres and then permanent wetland fill of 11.4 acres over about 190 miles So 258 or so acres of wetland impacts permanent and temporary over that distance and in addition to that We've offered an in-loop fee because these are unavoidable impacts after we after we avoided all the impacts we could and the Amount of money due based upon the formulas at the state and federal level for those unavoidable impacts is something around 4.2 million dollars We have also proposed six land parcels as compensation so that those land parcels will be protected in perpetuity Three of which are within the Dead River Watershed which is an outstanding river segment and three in other locations, but they're all in close proximity to the the project and its impacts and this is a This is a showing what a clearing would look like before the line was constructed It would be a hundred and fifty foot wide clearing Actually, I think this one's wider and you go to the next one and this is what it would look like That's the type of structure average height of 93 feet This one is around 80 feet and what this photo simulation shows is five years after the initial clearing for construction You get a lot of low shrub growth that softens the visual impact From the viewer's perspective. Maybe John. Just go back one slide if you don't mind the one more minute Yeah, so that this is actually the before shot. So this is not a simulation of the clearing This is a actually what the the current land looks like and the and that post one as you said is a the line plus five years of growth Let's go to the benefits Yeah, so so this is the we've we've redone the slide for anybody that's seen our presentation before to try to be more Descript of both the recognition of the impacts associated the project and the benefits so From an impact perspective, we recognize that and obviously there are visual impacts on recreation and scenic resources Wetland and wildlife disturbance. There's disruptions with from construction activity. Those are the Very near-term and tangible ones on the long-term perspective less tangible you have Impacts associated with First Nation regions in in Quebec you have impacts on the the reservoir hydro related to co2 mercury and methane changes in the community resources in those areas and Also for our project changes in wildlife habitat within the quarter So those are those are things that have to be balanced then against the benefits associated with the project to for everyone To kind of make their own determination about how they feel so one of the one of the benefits is jobs We've talked about 1700 jobs on average over the five-year construction period Property taxes for the towns that are along the quarter about 18 million a year lower energy costs, which we estimate for for Maine all the main customers to be 40 million per year over the the contract period of the agreement Enhanced reliability supply and opportunity for economic development and of course in addition to all the reduction in Carbon which we we estimate in our analysis at about three million metric tons annually for New England On the long-term perspective you have a timely response to climate change for the development of the dispatchable resources cleaner air price stability regional economy A public policy initiative moving forward as some of the things that Bruce had talked about And regional collaboration the last slide is just the the final thing which is just a picture of that was good though Yeah, yeah, okay. That's fine. Yep. It was very good. And so Fair and balanced that went into the Sun so I'm really trying to That was good. Thank you. You had about 35 minutes out of that 20. So, okay Sorry about that you squeezed your energy So I'm gonna give I'm gonna put my timer on three minutes. I'll take a few questions You know directed to what you just saw remember when I come back to this But then my timers on let's you had your hand up first Could you say your name actually podium, please I'm sorry I Should have said that we're gonna get you on film And so if we would appreciate it if you're gonna speak you get to the podium And maybe if you want to ask a couple questions I could get behind sure the mood. I'm a little bashful So putting me on camera might be a challenge, but Jeff McCabe resident of the municipality of Skowhegan a lot of fun facts there Lost most of them really just trying to figure out some of the impacts your slide in regards to the actual Visual impact there was some communication or you know Sort of time wise how long that visual impact would be what are we talking about for distance? That showed in the view of our visual consultant to one associates in Yarmouth that show what? Vegetation that have been trimmed more or less the ground level would look like in height and density in about five years Okay, so what's the visual impact as far as distance wise on the river both upstream and downstream? Oh, you're talking about the Canterbury River crossing. Yeah. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. So the ask again so Where the transmission line crosses the Canterbury River? What are we talking about for a visual impact distance wise? Yeah, it would be Think a quarter mile upstream and a half mile downstream of the crossing is where from the water from the rafters Yeah, or boaters perspective you be sure you wouldn't see the structures You would see the wires and the closest they would approach the water is 200 feet above the water And also when you're crossing beneath the line, you know in line with it If you looked to the northwest or to the southeast you wouldn't see the structures because there are significant buffers of several hundred feet on Each side of mature vegetation that can be retained because the wires are so high above the water But an initial construction that vegetation would not be clear to it would not be cleared No, it would not be cleared if we went back to that graph another question to in regards to I'll be briefer on this one I think so the discussion about the parcels of land being exchanged in the Dead River corridor The conservation easements is there someone that's lined up to take those easements currently? Is there an organization or somebody that's already in line to get those easements in that property here? No We have not identified recipients yet. Okay. Thank you I'm Becky Bartavik some Sierra Club. I live in Northhaven I Have a lot of questions, but I wanted to just a couple of things No net loss of wetlands is the clean water act is what the clean water act says So you've got a large number 200 acres of wetlands In a state that relies on our hydrology for our habitat The in lieu fee doesn't do anything for saving wetlands It just puts money in a bank that might buy some land that was you know already we were already losing wetlands How do you how do you answer that in terms of climate? Because it's going to affect the climate if we lose wetlands, right well a couple of things the the money that goes into the in lieu fee which is significant is aggregated by the state as you probably know and They identify the areas that are most at risk and most ecologically valuable and purchased land in those areas what we say with respect to wetlands is that we acknowledge that there's a lot that they're clearing of wetlands, so a lot of forested wetlands will be converted to scrub shrub wetlands and That is not a loss of wetlands It's a change of functions and values and that change of functions and values is explained in detail in the main DEP and the Army Corps applications so that Certain species that typically live in wooded areas Will not utilize those areas afterwards but species that live in more scrub shrub habitat would So that's okay. And so the second question the shrub this yeah, just second question. I'll sit down This shrub habitat that's along the corridors Do you not intend to keep those corridors open for maintenance of the of the transmission lines? We would have to keep them open and they would be maintained in that in a permanent state In the scrub shrub so initially we clear them of the trees that are capable of growing into the conductors And then from that point forward we would keep them in a scrub shrub habitat permanently with with chemicals Or how are you doing? We would initially cut and then we would treat the stumps to reduce Stumps stump sprouting and then we would treat with herbicides with hand pressurized herbicides in wetlands That's my point not in wetlands. No, no building wedded forested wetlands We would not spray in wetlands Tony can I ask a quick question Could we see the slide of The river the view that's said to not be important or attractive With the lines going across We need to switch over I've been going to your meetings, and I don't feel that your photos truly represent what we'll actually look at I've worked on that river for 21 years, and I can tell you that we're on that area a lot more than five to seven minutes But I just wanted to let you know that that's a place where a lot of wildlife is seen every day eagles There's deer. There's moose. It's a popular fishing spot It's where the cold stream comes in And I think that it's being really misrepresented by you by saying it's not an important part of the river The gorge goes by quickly. This is where we spend our time It's when I come around that corner each day I say to my guests that that's my favorite part in the river and I know I'm not the only guide with that sentiment And I just wanted to make sure that You're aware of that because you guys really downplay it so I just wanted to make sure you knew that I'm Kimberley Lyman. I live in Karatunk Sorry Can you tell me then this is a question what do you use to spray? The corridors to keep them down because they definitely currently Do not look like that picture you showed they're brown and they're dead Right, so I can't tell you off the top of my head the chemicals that we use. It's a it's a mix of chemicals When they are sprayed initially every four years, they look brown and dead but I can tell you that over time when You know, we have capable and non-capable vegetation a capable can grow into the conductor safety zone Those are trees that are tall at maturity and then non-capable vegetation is like shrubs That would not have to be cut or sprayed because they never grow tall enough and over time we use less herbicides because the treatment favors the non-capable vegetation at the expense of the capable because they take a foothold and they they tend to take over so and they're they're all hand pressurized They're not broadcast but individual specimens of capable trees are sprayed so that it's not aerial and it's not done In a way that would produce drift off-site In fact, there's a standard at the state level that aerial spraying cannot occur when when speeds are 15 miles per hour When speeds are 15 miles are greater. We apply that to our ground-based crews voluntarily to absolutely minimize drift off target and I just want to add that I if Jerry was describing the river I don't know if you I mean I I don't I don't want to have anybody leave with an implication that we don't understand how important the Candybeck River is and Obviously that's important part of the dialogue with the DEP. We're looking at different alternatives including a buried approach across Well, no, I just wanted to make sure that everybody knew that yeah, okay Questions and answers Yeah So I'm hearing some pretty definitive numbers four point two million dollars for mitigation I think we've all read twenty two million dollars potential settlement for some of the rafters Maybe forty million dollars in rate payer benefit. I'd be really interested in what information you can provide to us I think most people who are in the world know that natural gas is what sets the price So it'd be interesting to know where you're projecting natural gas prices to go in terms of delivering those 40 million dollar Benefits to main rate payers and then speaking of specific benefits. I'd like to know Publicly, what do you expect CMP's profit to be from this line? So which do I address all of the points? Are you answering the question? What's I always start from the one? We start from one end to go back to the other profit You know, we have not yet disclosed what our earnings will be for the company The that will definitely have at a point in time when we do that It has to be done Because we're a publicly traded company and a fair disclosure to to everyone So that's something that the investment community has also not been communicated to and when we do will come will communicate that and the 40 million is based on the 40 million is a production cost simulation There were I think three models that were put into the public utility case commission proceeding for estimations The I believe the generator group had a one-year model that was came in pretty much in line with ours for the first year London economics was hired by the public utility commission and had a lower number. So 40 million is our estimate It's to your point. It's based on what forward gas prices are going to be what load is what things are it is It is an estimate associated with forward production cost They're good like six others And now you're gonna get a chance though plus a presentation which I may go to right now So we've been a couple quick questions in between. Thank you very much. That was useful for me. I hope was for everyone else Jeremy would you like to start? I'll give you five minutes. Maybe even a little more Sure I'll be pretty short and sweet because I think at least I find the most benefits sort of the Q&A exchange I think that's probably what most people would like to hear rather than us talk at you So I'm Jeremy Payne I'm the executive director of the main renewable energy Association We're a trade association based in Augusta made up of renewable energy generators So when solar hydro biomass waste to energy titled storage So in terms of who is that and what is that in Maine? That's It's about three billion dollars of total investment in the last 15 years That's about 1500 megawatts of clean green renewable power made here in Maine and that represents about 2,500 jobs to Mainers Paying about 22 23 million dollars annually in property taxes So we have pretty significant concerns about what this line could mean for existing and future renewable development Also sort of puzzled by the discussion around reliability You know we I think most people are aware that we produce more electricity in Maine than we consume which is great much in The same way we do with blueberries Lobsters and lots of other commodities and that's that's a good thing potatoes paper But I'm not sure why Maine Would benefit from a greater reliable system that is ultimately benefiting Massachusetts and I obviously understand we're part of a regional power grid And so the implications for Massachusetts do have an impact on Maine as well But we certainly don't have a reliability issue in Maine anytime soon We're also really concerned about congestion So when you put think of it think of sort of transmission lines as a highway you put more cars on a road You're going to see more traffic So we're certainly concerned with the potential impacts of bumping off existing Main-made clean electricity mostly from biomass and hydro is what's most likely going to be bumped off We have real concerns about what this line is going to do to those facilities And in particular some of the upgrades that will be required for sort of the next folks who are at the plate Who comes forward who wants to develop the next storage project the next title project the next grid scale solar project? By by this line potentially taking up whatever excess headroom is left on these transmission lines What is what is the next person to the plate going to have to pay to make sure that they're able to effectively? efficiently and competitively connect their clean energy project We have a lot of concern about whether this is actually clean You know, I read with great interest a lot of the forums that have gone on a Lot of the activities that the Public Utilities Commission to me that you know There's two letters that are missing at every single one of these and that's HQ You know, Hydro Quebec should be here. They should be at the Public Utilities Commission. They should be here They should be in Farmington. They should be in Jackman. They should be telling us what specific electrons will be delivered Into through and ultimately into Boston. We don't know what's going to be coming through so far We're sort of asked to just trust us and no disrespect to anybody here at the mic or at Behind the podium here, but or the horseshoe rather But I would argue that given some of the challenges that CMP is facing right now I don't think you're really in a position to credibly say just trust us as it relates to the electrons as it relates to the Rape pair benefit as it relates to the impacts on the environment And I think just sort of the last thing I want to say just to reiterate is you know We're not opposed to renewable energy. Obviously. That's what this trade association that I worked for it does We want to see more clean green electrons. We just want them to be Generated in Maine of course, but what we would like is Specific clear public evidence that this project will not harm existing or future renewable development in Maine Thank you get four more minutes Thank you Soon would you like to go next And again, we'll save questions and we'll direct them after these All right, so my name is Sue Ealy and I'm the clean energy and policy Clean energy policy staff attorney for the Natural Resources Council of Maine The Natural Resources Council of Maine is a nonprofit member based organizations. We we have over 20,000 members and supporters in the state of Maine and we work on a variety of issues my Primary area of interest is is clean energy for the state of Maine Natural Resources Council of Maine is an intervener at the Public Utilities Commission where CMP's proposed transmission line is Looking to get a certificate of public convenience and necessity We're also interveners in the Department of Environmental Protection and the land use planning Commission procedures As of right now no hearings have been set there, but the process has started And I'd be happy to answer any questions about the the process there at either the PUC the DEP or the LU PC and there's also a Process happening down in Massachusetts where the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities is evaluating the contracts between Hydro-Quebec and the energy distribution companies down in Massachusetts. We are not interveners there We did submit testimony. I'd be happy to share that with anybody who's interested But that just so for your awareness, there's a process going on there, too the Natural Resources Council of Maine is Opposed to this project. We have three primary reasons why we're opposed. The first is the site impacts As CMP mentioned this line is going to bisect Maine its point I think the statistic that thorn gave was 72% of the line is is running on existing corridors That means that there's 53 new miles that are going to be cut through Maine's north woods 53 miles 150 feet wide with new towers an average of 90 some odd feet tall So that's a really big impact to Maine Mains north woods is the largest undisturbed forest east of the Mississippi. It's incredibly important to wildlife It has deer wintering areas inland waiting water Foul areas vernal pools There's just a there's just an incredible amount of biodiversity up here that is going to be impacted by this and the science is just Continuing to grow about the impacts that come from fragmenting these types of forests CMP says that That these forests have been cut over we have a we have a robust logging industry here in the state of Maine That's not a terrible thing and what happens when you cut a forest as it grows back What happens with these transmission lines is that central main power cuts them and then Maintains them in a cut state and sprays herbicides So you're going to have ongoing habitat impacts. It's very difficult for species to cross those long Lines great for predatory birds snatching lots of small creatures It really disrupts the ecosystem and so that's that's one. We're really concerned about these impacts There's also site impacts. We have a scenic by way that runs through that area. We have a wonderful rafting economy Fishing economy and those things depend on our beautiful forests and our unbroken landscape So it's incredibly important the second reason as Jeremy mentioned is our own homegrown renewable energy industry We're despite attempts by the current administration and central main power we are doing a great job growing our renewable energy industry and This power line threatens that it is going to cause Congestion along our power lines and I'm going to make it much more difficult for Renewable energy projects that are coming down the line Every single capped landfill in the state of Maine is a great Possibility to put a big big old solar farm on it But but if you haven't gotten in line yet You're out of lock if CMP gets this line because it's going to be very difficult and very expensive to tie into mains Infrastructure if this line goes through so we're very concerned Not only do we want to grow our renewable energy because it's it's carbon-free. It's it's accountable It's really easy to tell we we made it here in Maine. We can account for the electrons There's no question of whether CMP and Hydrocobac are adequately accounting for carbon emissions It also you get tax revenue for the towns that host these sites There's jobs that go to Mainers. So there's a lot of other Tangential benefits that are important for the state of Maine that we could lose out if we have this project And then finally is the the larger carbon question Seltramane power is is very precise about the way they talk about the carbon benefits to this and that it's Accounting only in New England. So there's no accounting for outside of New England. Seltramane power is selling I'm sorry. Hydrocobac is selling this power Already, it's it's out there What we're getting here is a dedicated line through the state of Maine for their power But that doesn't mean that it's new. This is this is power that's already out there on the grid So we're not getting an added benefit. It's just an accounting trick where we're looking only in New England The power is being sold in other places. So we're talking about emissions just in New England So that's my that's my elevator elevator pitch And I'd like to use the remainder of my time if I have any to address some of the things that were said during the presentation I'm actually incredibly excited to hear some of the things that Bruce said during his presentation We do have an enormous climate problem that we need to address and it's going to be really hard Wicked hard. So we do need an all-hands approach. We need to be attacking Every single ability every single little thing that we can do to address climate change and I couldn't agree more and I'm curious if the the North Bridge urgency to Decarbonize is actually represented is actually a policy that central Maine power of ungrid and Iberdrola share And I asked that question because during the last legislative session central Maine power opposed Net metering which would allow people to easily connect their rooftop solar to the grid They opposed community solar which would have allowed people who don't have the ability to put solar panels on their homes to Band together with a bunch of other people and do and do community solar They have opposed net metering. I mean, that's not not my meeting They have opposed net metering, but they've also opposed non-wires solutions. So innovative technology forward-looking technology to help Blend together energy efficiency renewable energy and energy storage In creative ways to reduce the needs for for poles and wires and expensive transmission upgrades and These things are not the actions of a company that truly wants to address climate change The difference between promoting rooftop solar non-wires alternatives community solar Electric vehicles Rapid electrical electric vehicle adoption the difference between those policies and what CNP is proposing is dedicated Profits for their shareholders and that's and that's what this that's what this line has in addition to What they've talked about? It's dedicated benefit for their shareholders and that's money that goes in the shareholders pockets and not in main right-payers pockets So I Think I think I can leave it there But I'm happy to answer any questions There's there's a number of ways if citizens are concerned about this project to get involved There's ability to give public comment to the Public Utilities Commission The docket number is 2017-00232 They can give public comment to the DEP or the LUPC and then on NRCM's website we have a petition that we are collecting signatures for So you can just Google NRCM any CEC petition We have over 2600 people in the state of Maine who have signed on to our petition opposing Central Maine Power's proposed transmission line, and we're looking for more. Thank you very much I was gonna say you could have said it's good NRC website. We'll catch all those numbers Thank you. So and again, we'll come back around and we're gonna save questions again with target questions You guys may have some questions yourself. Let's uh here from David AMC, please Can you go back to the Second slide bank Second slide bank gets has something to do with the goes on in the back room to the line And I believe it was either the first or second slide showing the route choosing the route Yeah, okay, if you just leave that up Thanks Thanks to Dot and Sierra Club for having us. I'm Dave public over I'm a senior staff scientist with the athletes and Mountain Club I'm actually based it in New Hampshire, but I do spend a lot of my time in Maine The AMC is a regional conservation organization with over a hundred thousand members in a dozen we're headquartered in Boston We have a dozen membership chapters including one in Maine With all due respect, I believe we're three years older than the Sierra Club Help me here And among other activities we own 75,000 acres of forest land in Maine east of Moosehead Lake Which we manage for a combination of backcountry recreation sustainable forestry ecological protection and community partnerships, so we do have a very strong interest in the main landscape It was interesting to hear Mr. Phillips say we have one chance to get this right CMP had a chance to get this project right They got it wrong we As we develop our 21st century energy infrastructure We believe we should use 21st century technology, which they have not If you look at this map and some of the concerns I express are going to be similar to what what Sue said They indicate that oh, there's all this valuable land To the north there's all this valuable land in the mountains to the south and they found the gap through the middle of it Well, I challenge anybody to look at the main landscape and find that gap. It does not exist This is a continuous landscape, and it is a globally significant landscape This TNC has identified the western main mountains region as part of the largest area of relatively intact temperate hardwood and mixed forest in the world It's one of the few places where you can find such an expansive area We're almost every wildlife species that is supposed to be there is still there with the exception of things like like wolf and cougar which have which have disappeared it is National Audubon has identified it as the largest nationally significant important bird area in the country and it's true that a lot of it is commercial forest land But as we said forest grow back and this would be one of the one of the largest Permanent fragmenting features across this globally significant forest region exceeded only by routes 201 and 26 So we have very serious concerns about the ecological impact of 53 miles of of new corridor We also have serious concerns about the impact on the Canabec Gorge Again, this is a nationally significant equal Scenic and recreational resource There are few specific places in Maine that have stronger protection in law and policy than the Gorge The Maine Rivers Act, Lepsey Zoning, the site resource Natural Resources Protection Act all call out the Canabec Gorge as a resource worthy of a high level of protection I also agree with the rafter the raft guide who said that this isn't just something you pass by floating on This is a place where people spend time You know, it's at the upper part of the more gentle part of that river corridor people stop and spend lunch They spend time there and this would be the most significant human intrusion on this otherwise wild and undeveloped river corridor And what's unfortunate is that these impacts are avoidable They could have done the project differently They could have buried the new corridor along existing roads as other projects in the That our competitors in the mass RFP project have chosen to do they can bury it under the Gorge We know that these options are technologically feasible Again, other other other projects have proposed them including the late-limited northern pass Who found it to be techno burying 60 miles of their corridor through much more difficult Areas was both technically and economically feasible and the TDI line that goes through Vermont fully buried already Permitted with a very little public opposition So there are options this project could be done better and we think it's unfortunate They didn't choose to do it do it, but as it stands as proposed. We are we are opposed to it we have intervened in the DEP and lepsy processes and Again, we think this type of impact Using 20th century technology to create a 21st century energy infrastructure is inappropriate Unwarranted and unbalanced provides More impact than benefit They did it right the economic benefits would still be there the jobs would still be there And the other benefits would still be there so But I guess that's in the interest of time. That's all I will say I give you I give you a little about another minute But no, I'm that's good now with Let me just let me just say I On the main table out there I have put a copy of a report that was done by Janet McMahon one of Maine's most respected ecologists on the ecological Values of this region and and why it's more than just hammered industrial forest land, you know We may take this region for granted because it's our backyard and but it's a truly special place and We need to take better care of it Thank you. Hope I'm still on the microphone. Um, so the only to balance anyone here I'm gonna say the same thing to the panel The three speakers are just presented when anybody like to pose questions to them as they wrap up Do they wrap up? On my chocolate. What are you doing over here? It's both in the middle part. I'm not usually on the right either. I'm sorry. My apologies. That's fine One minute I thought I was in my friends I'm Lincoln Jeffers on the economic and community development director for the city and let me start with I think The future of our world is dependent upon finding alternative clean renewable power sources It's can't be tied to fossil fuels. I think this clean energy connect project is a good strong step in that direction As the economic development director for the city for the past 18 years And really in my job, we've got a mantra its jobs investment taxes this project hits all three of those It's a nine hundred and fifty million dollar project. Importantly, it's paid by people outside of the state of Maine 250 million of that project will be in Lewiston the DC AC converter station is going to be in Lewiston I can tell you that our that that 250 million dollar investment will translate to five to six million dollars of annual taxes in Lewiston and Lewiston that that's enormous money Lewiston was named the eighth best run municipality in the country And large measure because we have very efficient government services Our spending on a per capita basis is about half of what the other nine large communities in the state are and yet We still have a very high tax rate. So this project is very important to Lewiston I will say both our city council unanimously endorsed it with the resolution of support both the current mayor and our recent past mayor Also are strong in support of this project All of that is my professional hat and let me take my professional hat off and say personally I put myself in the environmental camps. I'm a former river guide. I'm a former ski bomb My daughter is currently living that life out in Colorado. I am very Tied to the environment care deeply about it. I still think this project is the right project for Maine and the region the As we look In my notes here I have you know, should we take wind should we follow solar? Should we follow hydro and Bruce Phillips beat me to the punch and you put it much more eloquent that I would have My answer is we we got to do all the above at the end of the day All of these have Will have impacts limitations And there's been quite a bit of talk from from some of the folks who are opposed to the project about sucking up existing capacity In the current power lines So what do we do just sort of say we've got capacity and we're never going to use it We're just going to hold it in and And hold it for somebody in the future who may be able to use it There's existing demand today to use that Somebody is willing to pay to use it There's the investment CMP has made as well as regional ratepayers. So to say that We should hold that and and just sort of set it aside for some future use when the time comes future investments We'll need to be making at that time We can debate back and forth. I think Thorne's presentation Which went through pretty quickly, but I do think they took tremendous care in the sighting this project any Renewable power Wherever it's cited you've got to put a tremendous transmission line connecting it the larger grid So is everybody going to line up about against the next transmission line that's being expanded to connect some major offshore wind or some Ridghtop wind or some other project. I think I think it's important To really support these projects recognize that if we like to flip the light switch And have the power come on and we want to have a future it cannot be from burning fossil fuels We really need to embrace all of the Renewable clean energy sources there are Quebec hydro, I think there are questions Hydro Quebec I always get HQ and each night. I always back it up I think I always want to call it the wrong way in our presentation I heard them give and I realized they're not here and so I'm speaking it's it's here safe for the attorney in the room But really their demand runs counter to New England's demand most people in Canada Heat with electricity because it's a very cheap source So when their capacity is as a peak is when our electrical man is actually down in Maine and the rest of New England They only use about 25% of the capacity that they have in During the summer months They also have existing capacity in the dams that they've got up there They spill very little water, but that is because they are Building up the reservoirs behind the dams So when the time comes when there is increased demand they can meet it And it is also a consistent source of power as opposed to an intermittent source of power Which again, I think we need to do wind. I think we need to do solar I think we also need to do hydro There's a former river guy that does not come easily because I realize there are impacts Last couple of points CNP I do have direct experience with these folks I've been with the city since 2000 I have done about a hundred and forty five million dollars with the projects with CNP In Lewiston specifically the main power reliability program has a major Backbone of it is right here in Lewiston to where we wrote substation the converter station It was going to be proximal. I'm not sure exact distance over things within a half mile or so of the of that Substation so that's how it's going to connect going from direct current to alternating current and beyond to the larger grid They listened to we part of that Larra be road substation. We had a lot of residents concerned that the increase Capacity running on the on the power lines behind their houses, which they had grown accustomed to hey That's my backyard. Well actually it isn't their backyard And so when somebody was going to actually cut trees on land that they own which the CNP is absolute right We had residents turn out CNP listened. They were thoughtful They changed the configuration height of their poles and they worked with us to really address the concerns of the neighbors And they needed more power downtown and again CNP listened and really deliberate on the promises on time And they get a little extra time robin a little flexible. It was about six minutes, but go ahead I Think I've largely Sorry to talk over you with me. I didn't see you, but let's do some questions any anybody specific I'll remember a podium, please if you could get to the podium right here at the end of this bench and put your And state your name. Yeah, please sir. You were first. That's you guys back there Somebody my name is Barbara. Oh, I live here in Lewiston. I live in the neighborhood. You're talking about Lincoln, obviously I Haven't been part of the discussions that you describe. I'm sorry. I wasn't because I'm very interested in this project I live up near where the power lines come over the dam in the neighborhood that's called Mishu acres and It's not far. It's less than Probably a half mile from the current new station Which would make it within a mile of the new substation? And I guess I have concerns about the generation of electromagnetic energy in that area. I also have questions about Progress in general it seems like We saw a picture of how the development would come in. Well, I was there when the Substation came in it kind of came down around and through existing corridors and What's the stop this from all? Gee we underestimated how much power Massachusetts needs and suddenly this isn't set of a two tower line coming through It's a four power line coming through That could happen it does happen repeatedly because people buy this notion that progress means More is better And I'm not sure that once you build this line that won't be more lines built through that corridor And the image as the energy need rises, so I'm very interested specifically why you see this is not a health threat in our area and I'm also specifically interested in why you see it as something that Wouldn't be expanded in the future again Thank you. Thank you a couple questions. Anybody want to take that on? I Was going to say as far as the actual design and the EBM that's really more CMP's Expertise than mine and as far as what the long-term group build out. I mean the the As I think we've talked about and Sue head on a little bit We we still have a great many of approvals associated that we need to get through with this project So no one should have the the impression that we were in the ninth inning in this baseball game We still have a lot of discussion and a lot of dialogue to have That you know doing these kind of projects is incredibly complicated and challenging and takes a lot of time So I don't my own opinion is a Transmission line coming into Lewiston is not going to make it any easier for a second line to come into Lewiston Right help them back. Yeah, so on EMF CMP has not done any of independent research on EMF. It's been done by many others including by the government and To my knowledge, we're not aware of any studies that have shown a definitive link between Electromagnetic fields and health impacts, but you know We encourage you to look and do your own research look at the research that's been done and see if you know You're comfortable with that results of that You might talk about We have a rule about acronyms Do you like me to answer that yeah, so I can't tell you the drop-off, but it does attenuate as a function of distance Significantly, I Hope that was helpful Your name My name is Julie Tibbets. I am a resident year-round in Otis Field, Maine In the summer. I'm a resident of T2 R9 which is way up in the North County a bit of background for five glorious years I was resident number 37 in the forks of 38 I Have a couple of questions And one comment my comment first. Thank you for coming today CMP This cannot be a comfortable room for you to be in and I appreciate you coming and being available for us to ask questions. I Have a lot of them. I'm gonna limit them right here. My first one may be easy. What is our time frame? What are we looking at if anything were to go through as smoothly as central main power would love it to go through? Uh Well, I think the right now are if you look at our filings and our information that's out there publicly What we're we're thinking about is all permits and approvals by the end of? 2019 beginning instruction at the end of 2019 beginning at 2020 and then with a completion in 2022 with a commercial operation date at the at the end of 2022 beginning at 2023 A follow of different question along another lines Reading through the information. I saw today and listening to you You said 70% of the corridor that we are planning or you are planning is already existence and 30% would still need to be either acquired or built as am I Pretty close as 72% of it is an existing corridor that does it means that we're gonna build next to an existing line So that portion of the line will involve about 75 foot of clearing But it will be clearing of a quarter that we own so just to be totally clear It's a it's a it's an existing quarter already owned by by cmp And we'll be expanding 75 feet and next to the existing line to put a new line in the other Quarter that we're talking about to the Quebec border is a is a new owned right away or under the control of cmp So we don't have to acquire anything. We've worked with the landowners in that area Most of it is acquired one piece of it is a long-term lease that piece of it will be a hundred and fifty feet of Of clearing and as we said, there's different views on on how to describe that part of the of that part of the clearing Our view is that it's an area that has already been currently impacted associated with logging And obviously we respect the view of other people who who still see a great value around fragmentation Avoiding but but that's kind of the we own we own the whole quarter About 75 feet is going to need to be cleared next to an existing and then a hundred and fifty from the forks to the Quebec Board, okay So the land that still needs to be worked up is all pretty much in one chunk It's not a couple miles here a couple miles here all the way down to the coast That's right. So the the every every part of the project that we're going to be building on is currently owned So we we own it all in that Jerry talked about and we did kind of rush through it But it is predominantly two large landowners going from the forks there and as Jerry said it allows us some flexibility To try to avoid as many impacts as we can and again our opinion is it's an area that is already impacted There are power lines that go across the river Another company owns them was there any discussion with Brookfield about a merger or partnership that wouldn't require New lines going across the river when they're already at Harris station and down at Wyman It's a it's a great question and it says cash and a discussion That's currently going on right now in the DEP where we're answering those questions within that process both about going up to All the way up to the dam Different crossing location and an underground design as I said before we're we don't think that the underground design is reasonable We think that the overhead is the the appropriate way that balances impact and and benefits, but we're we've also said that if we're required to we'll do it so the the You know, there is a lot of reasons that go into why they were challenges with Areas where you currently can't build That can interfere with our ability to do it what we're proposing is the the crossing We have and like I said the the questions you're asking are exactly the topic that's going on at the DEP right now Good questions. I'll set. Thank you I'm gonna come come back around a minute, but I do was logistics. I was supposed to show that everyone is at the Rest of you out to your left I think I saw somebody look in a minute ago Um Well, we're here for questions and answers. I was thinking that the panelists may have some questions and answers Between each other that might be helpful Go ahead Yeah, I have a question and I do have a comment You know it's clear we have different Appreciation of the landscape in which this new corridor would go through You know we heard the same thing in northern pass this new quarter. Oh, it's already hammered industrial forest land You know what we're doing is so big deal Well, there's a difference, you know Timber harvests are temporary they grow back at some mosaic of older forest and younger forest But I think one but but the other point is that Ownership changes and management changes and one only need to look at the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont Which used to be a couple hundred thousand acres of champion international land typical industrial forest land a large North-south power line running down from Canada 150 foot wide corridor Well champion sold that land and two big chunks of it went into conservation land part of it's part of the Conti National Wildlife Refuge and part of it is part of the State of Vermont's wildlife management area those lands are being managed much differently if there's Harvesting it's limited, you know to wildlife management purposes These these these forests are being restored to a more natural condition But that quarter is still there and it's going to be there for a long time Even if the rest of the forest around it is wilderness. So to say that, you know, this is Hammered industrial forest land. It's still forest land. It's still Relatively intact and it's still capable of providing a wide range of habitat benefits and I do have a question for the CMP folks is that This new quarter is going to be 150 foot wide The right-of-way is 300 feet wide Can you say equivalently that that Quarter won't be expanded to put another line next to it Now I could say with it that we have no current plans to utilize it no current points. Yeah, no, that's right Which means it could have Yeah, I mean it one scenario that plays out is that We learn more and more about Climate change that it is even a bigger risk and whether it means wind from Quebec or or that some of the wind projects that Were proposed and other places in the region are brought forward. So this is a quarter that In the future can be utilized to solve future problems. I Think I think I said we have no plans to I that's exactly what I said we have no plans for additional Don't work. We if we were to do something else We would have to begin the process that we've been you know working on for a number of years all over again So I agree the message is that's good. It was clear. I think yeah, it's it's there Questions either side don't just raise your hand. So we was gonna say something. I Don't have a question, but I do have a comment I Believe that and I welcome you to respond The way that this whole project has been framed has been an either or either we accept that the only way to get Large-scale hydro into the mix is for central main power to run a line Creating a new 53 miles of corridor and beefing up the existing the rest of the mileage or nothing And I I would challenge you that that's a false choice that there are existing inner ties in New England between Hydro-covac in New England and and as you've said at the PUC that those are are At or near capacity, but there are other ways to to beef up other interties between Hydro-covac in Canada and the New England grid system and then it doesn't have to be a Brand-new transmission line that's going to cut through mains forest Versus nothing that there that that's not the choice that's here That's that's the choice that CMP has and that's the choice that CMP made when you bid into the Massachusetts RFP process But that there are other ways to bring energy into the New England grid system. No, we agree I mean, I think the competitive market as I said there were 51 bids that creates innovation efficiency Competition around that process now we we had no control over what that legislation looked like and what the evaluation process was All we could do is propose ideas now that it was not an either or for us We we provided a basket of alternatives for for Massachusetts that included I think a total of six bids Some of those included some hydro combined with wind hydro only some of them were wind only some of there were solar With battery and when so we had six bids that had all different kind of creative ideas that we were excited about all of them and To answer your point some of those were main based projects most of the majority of our bids actually were Projects that were based in Maine. So in the end the the legislation the way the process worked the evaluation process that we were not a part of Selected this project. So we're not saying either or that was a selection that was made by Massachusetts and You know, we're proud of this project. We think it's a great project But we have a lot of other ideas We have other ideas that we think also can go to this climate change and and Sue I know you asked me a question. Do we have goals or do we at the ebidrola oven grid level? I just wanted to commit to you that you know ebidrola oven grid have a commitment to become carbon neutral by 2050 that 50% CO2 emissions Come by 2030 compared to 2007 and 30% Emissions compared to 2007 by to 2020. So this is an important thing. It's and and I think We you know, I know I am committed going forward to do everything I can to work together Collaboratory to come up with solutions if people didn't think that the legislation was right or the evaluation process, right? I think there's opportunities on the next thing that happens to find a better way to do things But we are where we are. I you know again just to maybe just a there were a couple of one thing I would Point out is another area that I think both of us would agree to disagree is and and main renewable energy also is this area of congestion and and and Whether this energy is actually Incremental it's a it's a tough question and it and it we've had a lot of dialogue it at the Public Utility Commission We believe that that our project is actually creating additional transfer capability and that the congestion issue is not a problem That actually it's lower congestion And we also believe that all of this energy is actually incremental not only to New England and Maine to put to to the globe And I know that's an area where we haven't been able to find common ground But it is a an area that I think we have to agree to disagree on Please I've got three So we heard about the 1700 jobs On average over five years. I'm curious and I'll maybe I'll just run through three of them Or I can stop whatever's easiest you tell me I have a better memory if you don't want it It's all right, so let's do the first one so 1700 jobs can you commit that a hundred percent of those will be main That that will be made up of a hundred percent main workforce. No, why not well because I think that there's going to be some Some skill sets that are most likely going to be outside I mean part of that part of that that 1700 is made up Which peaks at 3,500 in the period of time is made up of both indirect and direct jobs It was a study that was done by the University of Southern Maine To look at this it actually benchmarks well against what happened in MPRP. So not only is this People that are going to actually building building the project, but this is also The restaurants the hospitals the other services along the area that also have jobs that benefit associated with it So the one thing that we found in MPRP the 1.4 billion dollar project that was built here in Maine We were surprised how many Journeyman workers there were that actually live in Maine that want to want to work on Maine projects But have to travel across across the country and we also have very very good construction companies within Maine That will definitely work on this project, but to guarantee it I think the idea is we want the best people that are doing the best whether it's safety and reliability And how they do things we want the best people here We know that a lot of those people won't be in Maine, but we would never commit to a hundred percent Sense do you think it's ten percent? No, I think I think we were probably about 50 50 or so and the MPRP project I'd have to I'd have to check that out. I could see you thinking about a data request And then maybe I'll just run through these two because they're not as complicated as that one So obviously you chose a DC line direct current so essentially the electrons grab on one end and are delivered on the other Why not an AC line and for those folks who don't know the difference in why I'm asking? Basically, if you have an AC line that creates on and off ramps so that in-state Generators could potentially tie into the line and I can tell you from from our perspective That would address a lot of our concerns and then last I certainly understand why the city supports the project. It makes a lot of sense in terms of property tax and new tax And then you're gonna let me I'm gonna forget the second and let's yeah, let me answer it So so that the issue on DC is a complicated one people may not know that there's AC system. I think you can imagine as a shape that moves up and down Quebec and in new and the US are not synchronized So you cannot have an AC connection between those two systems. It just doesn't work You have explosion damage to equipment because those two signals can't the only way to interconnect them is through Essentially a clutch that you have between them and that means converting from AC to DC back to DC back to AC Now you can you can put those two converter stations right next to each other and have an AC line that goes all the way from Quebec all the way to the heart, but you lose about half of you double the amount of losses associated with that so by DC lines are about twice as efficient They deliver they have half the losses as I see so trying to find the longest DC line That allows a connection to the furthest point and to the strong point of the system here in Lewiston is one one reason Why that why that happens the second one is? Hydro-Cobac is is buying all 1,200 megawatts of that transmission capacity That's the size of the line. That's the capability of the line The ISO in New England does not allow any feed into The ISO for anything more than 1200 so even if we built an AC line There would not be able to be a connection into it So those are the two reasons okay And then the last one I'm not sure who should answer it is you know as I start to say I understand why the city of Lewiston supports the project that makes sense from your taxable value of adding more But the reality is I believe you know what what what would you say to say the town of Livermore Falls? You know they've got a biomass plant there that employs a bunch of people bunch of loggers truckers foresters What if they lose their job so it's great for Lewiston, but what about for Livermore Falls? What about for Stratton what about for a community that has one of these generators whether it's biomass or hydro or otherwise who potentially get Bumped off and their projects are no longer viable So our our net and this goes back to a production cost simulation. It's a it's an incredibly complex model that tries to Simulate the market for electricity and the way it does it by dispatching the lowest cost units to the highest cost units Generally on the margin you see Natural gas and oil so when we look over our model predicts a significant amount of Generation that will no longer run that's gas and oil. That's for for people that care about climate. That's a good thing That's about moving towards decarbonization. It's taking that carbon out of the atmosphere We've in our model. We looked at is is a project that was currently Passable was not going to be retired in Maine as a result of this project And this goes to a side point which is this idea of lower energy prices for customers that we talked about That also means that the generators are going to see lower a sales price So the by not doing this project their money is going to essentially flow from the pockets of customers in New England to the generators and if so the those generators are going to run less and Our model says for Maine none of the projects move from a category of being Projects that wouldn't retire to being retire so we don't see this project having an impact of retiring on any project in Maine and London economics that did the work for the Public Utility Commission also came to that came same conclusion I think they found some projects in the Connecticut with that would retire Please do so I I recognize that that's what your modeling showed. I just want perhaps to give the other side of of the story that there has been Testimony in the Public Utilities Commission that indicates that under new ISO rules the way that the the way that the energy market is looked at that it That it may be that this project will not clear the forward capacity market and will result in Closures within the state of Maine and that's been an alternate Theory that's put out there that would actually cause Have an end result be more closures of plants in Maine Just so I make sure because I thought that maybe maybe we're misunderstanding each other But I thought the debate was whether any cc will clear the capacity market. I'm sorry. Did I say I thought you're saying whether the other Projects that no whether the any cc would would clear the Ford capacity so you're so there's there's two problems to that So first is that you wouldn't get the Ford capacity benefits that are part of the Money benefits that you think would come to ratepayers and the second piece of that is that we would see Maine be modeled as its own energy pockets So from an energy perspective again, this is We get to a point I think Sue of inside baseball and and I think in the fairness of the dialogue. I think These are complex markets. Our view is we don't see any Congestion on the energy market. We do see price suppression price suppression means less revenue for Oil and gas generators and it means more savings to customers in New England. So that's we don't see congestion Happening in our in our approach and again, that's our view on the capacity side If the NECC does clear the market, and I think that I think the generator groups are arguing that it won't Then your right point is right if it clears There will be a reduction in the capacity market that will mean savings to customers if it doesn't If it doesn't clear customers prices will be higher the generators will Make more money. So that's the trade-off here and what happens and I my understanding in the testimony is the capacity Was the hardest one to demonstrate was there was the most Disagreement on how it how it might play out and stop you there. Okay, a little little technical. Yeah What's I wrong though? Did I hear kind of in my opinion and in my opinion? Did I just hear that in our findings and our findings? So it wasn't my findings Far above my pay grade But it was alternate testimony that was put in front of the public utilities Which which indicates that CMP's estimates may be about two-thirds overstate it if their capacity market Analysis is not correct Yeah, I heard that one. I'm just trying to get down to a sentence that we might be able to understand I think I've got some people a few of the questions you said here for yeah turn over here. Yeah Um Again on my name is Becky and I was interested in some of the some of your slides one of which was the the pros and cons and I noticed that You did not have either energy efficiency as part of the mix Of solutions, I guess that was you actually Brian that didn't seem as though there was any efficiency Listed on that there's no micro grids on that and I'm really curious as to How you would answer the issue? We've just heard that the Russian, you know Russians have ability to hack into ISO New England it seems to me that Distributed generation and local local energy sources rather than You know big ISO New England transmission lines are actually going to be much safer and much more secure So I'd like to hear what you have to say about that Sure Can you hear me? Okay. Yes so on Russian hacking it's that's way beyond my pay grade. So I You know other than I share your concern I can't really can't really say anything of any substance about it on On the energy efficiency question Maybe in my effort to kind of Get through the slides quickly I skipped over the point But it is in the second part of the analysis that I talked about when I ticked through that list of nine technologies And one of them or here it's a customer demand response. It's number nine on the list customer demand response Includes energy efficiency energy management All sort of whole cluster of things and it's an important part of the solution. There's no doubt about it I mean of appliance standards that have been You know developed and implemented through government regulation have had a tremendous impact This has out of state and utility energy efficiency programs But if you recall the slide we we had Customer deficits in the summer season that were half of Electric load right so we may be able to save five percent ten percent fifteen percent through Continuing energy efficiency numbers. I'm not sure what the potential is But I don't think we can count on saving fifty percent of customer load through energy efficiency So just do you know about the booth Bay project the micro grid project where they actually Created ice in the summer with their solar and and reduce the amount of energy that was required and the Transmission line cost. Do you know about that project? I do not okay I think it would be worth looking at it. I will thank you I just I had just a one one thing in those nine wouldn't you assume that in those nine things whether it's the rooftop solar? Battery storage Those are all critical parts of micro grids So we do you would you see those nine things as eliminating micro grid that the micro grids are not part of your nine solutions Or is that another way of enabling it in your mind? Yeah, you know, I think So if you sort of look through that, you know, number three in the item is solar PV That includes both both utility scale central station, you know, which not micro grid, but the rooftop, you know would be and Battery storage can be in front of or behind the meter. That's part of many standard kind of micro grid systems And so I think I think you're right that the fair bit of the micro grid is is is built in there And but let me just come back to to to the core point from there, which is that I would not dispute that on paper we can create a lot of systems that that might work The question is whether we can do it with enough reliability that we want to put all of our eggs in One basket as a pathway to it to decarbonize and I have no problems with micro grids I think pursuing them is is is you know is well worthwhile as every item on that list of nine. I'm just saying Makes me uncomfortable counting on only those nine as a way to deal with the climate problem I think we ought to look broad on Just quickly weigh in on that as well I mean, I think it makes sense on a residential basis, but on an industrial basis to have on demand You know, I need a gazillion watts to run some some piece of equipment Are you really going to be able to handle that long-term in an area without wind solar and doing that with battery back up? I don't think you can I think you need hydro to meet that kind of demand your name please Dot Kelly Phippsburg, and I'm on the executive committee volunteer with the Sierra Club I want to thank all of you for coming for me. It's as if you came just to Educate me as well as the people here and that's been delightful Three small points or questions. I'd like to start with Bruce Phillips because I hadn't heard his presentation before and Agree that this is a huge kind of question. I Just want to understand you said we had three percent Wind and solar and in your chart where you showed that we were Exceeding what we need in the winter and a big deficit in the summer Was that dependent on your mix of solar and wind because solar seemed to be big in the summer Wind big in the winter and so I'm just wondering how much Adjustment you took for what wind you assumed and what solar you assumed. Yeah, so that's that's that's That's a great question Thank you and basically we Wind and solar to or in 2017 there were a little bit more than 3% combined as you said So what we did is we scaled up that those patterns for wind and solar So that the total amount of wind and solar megawatt hours equaled annual Electric load in in New England So we did make assumptions about how much to scale up wind and how much to scale up solar In both cases it was roughly 30 to 35 times And We could have done it differently But but the the the methodology that we chose was to minimize The cumulative of the total amount of surplus and deficit over the course of the year So, you know, we could have we could have gotten more wind, you know in less solar or you know the reverse and You know the the actual numbers on the chart would have been the same But the the the only way to to eliminate that Deficit in the summer with just with solar and wind Given given that the you know the the solar is not going to be producing electricity in the middle of the night Would be to dramatically increase the amount of wind that that that that we had and so Instead of producing the same number of megawatt hours over the course of the wind We might have had to I don't know what it would have been say double it or triple it, you know and and of course there's lots of impacts associated with the you know the transmission and and Development of renewables associated with that too. Did I didn't answer your question? That was very good. So I'm a little confused because I Do believe that from that solar and wind and storage and I look at hydro hydro is a good storage You say that that's what hydro Quebec is doing. That's what pumps Hydro would also do but it's a very it's it doesn't require as much Hydro as as base loading and bringing in, you know the huge number and so it's in Canada I must admit that I don't find that it's the best solution So and I when I looked at your slide that one I was wondering if you had worked with the solar and the wind differently That with of percentages that you would have actually recommended much more solar because it's not as effective and It needs to be in the summer and that's where you had your lowest being and and take the wind down and Have more solar I have more storage and I think that just to summarize. I think that's what I've heard that the project is not a horrible project, but that It has been done maximizing the profits to you know hydro Quebec perhaps and and CMP and that The people that you've heard have suggested that there are things that really need to be in this project as well So the other two questions and I'll do this very quickly. I'm watching the clock, but please no, okay, then I'll Not go there. I just wanted to highlight that that 40 million at least in conversations We've had to inform people Might be two-thirds less if it doesn't clear the Capacity market is that true or is the 40 million assuming it doesn't clear the 40 million is just an energy number So it has it's totally unrelated to the capacity estimate So the the 40 million number is really just a question of what your gas price is in the future What the load is what the dispatch and how that resolves and and also whether or not there's congestion and those things will Effect that but not the capacity clearing that won't have an effect Okay, and then my last one is the emf which I think is a very important one It is Lewiston so we held this in Lewiston and I think in part because I was Thinking that you might talk about the impacts in Lewiston and I would just encourage you to actually estimate and provide useful information to people Hopefully showing that it's well within you know Acceptable levels, so thank you You in line for questions, please. I just make one super quick comment about the assumptions Just if there's anything I've been doing this for ten years if there's anything I've learned which is I'm sure a lot less than everybody else up here But if there's anything I've learned in my ten years as it relates to energy projections It's not a matter of whether you're going to be right or wrong. You're definitely going to be wrong It's just a matter of by how much so whatever number he was put out there We're gonna be wrong. I 100% agree with that just so everybody knows that this is a in the inside baseball They call this dueling dueling models. So it's always an aspect of forecast. So you agree to agree My name is Ed buzzle, I'm from Moxigore, Maine I live right on the access road which the project is going to be using or utilizing to To be able to build a lot of this project My question is for Jerry. I guess it's about the cannibate gorge. I Read in the in the papers that you wrote I guess That the cannibate gorge is not a gorge or the lower cannibate gorge is not a gorge and it's not pristine And I'd really be interested to know how you came to that conclusion Okay, well the question was for him. Yeah, so Jerry's one said that please. Yeah, okay. Oh, that's right. That is Jerry. Yeah, I've got it is Jerry The The reason that we said that was because there's a couple of reasons one is that there's a guidebook that identifies the gorge as Restricted to the first three and a half miles below Harris Dam. So it's not really our definition of the gorge It's it's more like the the guidebooks and I can't recall the name of the guidebook but I can get you that after the presentation if you like and If you think about a gorge as a steep walled canyon The area that's proposed for the aerial crossing is not that you know, it certainly has topo to it, but it's not exposed Ledge, it's not vertical walls. Okay. Yeah, and and nothing that any of us should say Should come off as that we don't recognize the beauty of the gorge and that this is a this is a and the river I should say more correctly And this is a this is one of those things that are a trade-off and balance That that that we have and that's an important part of the dialogue with the DEP right now Well again definition of a gorge. I took a 67-year-old man He only you know He only kayak the lower section of the gorge because it was easier for him to do and I took him down the day before yesterday And I'd hate to tell him that what we went through was not a gorge and It wasn't pristine in it. He also told me he kayaked a lot out in Colorado and most of the rivers that he'd kayaked out They had some form of human intervention such as a house or power lines along that line. He was very impressed with his trip The other question I have is you said this won't be going until the 2019 you won't be building anything so the the We expect we there's no construction can't start actual what we consider construction Until all permits and approvals are required are done in the matter of time. Let me answer that question base best case scenario 2020 2020 okay, okay, like I said, I live on the access road the only tar road up to moxie pond and That road is being heavily heavily redone completely a rock bait and I've lived up there I built the camp in 95. I've been up there for 40 years I have never ever seen that road usually just throw a piece of tar on it. That's good. That's it This road has been built up over a foot. I tried to mow my lawn the other day I couldn't even begin to mow down by the road unless I had an ATV to mow it So I'm just wondering you say in 2020, but somebody's building that road up for heavy trucking right now Now that that's not that there's not if something's being done to you're talking about Trotdale Road No, I'm talking about the moxie Lake Road Yeah, they're there we would it, you know We should talk after just to make sure we get but I am certain that associated with this project There's no work that we're doing on any roads We won't do that until we get all the permits and approvals we need well It certainly has a rock base under it now and I'm not complaining about do it You know having a good road up to there, but definitely we've needed it for a long time Well, if you can give me the information after we'll look into it just to make sure that there there isn't any confusion with another project Well, I guess that leads to another question is I've been asking for like six months for a detailed topographical map and I haven't got it yet And in fact at one of the other meetings I was at I asked for that, you know that map a project of this size You would think for the public. I mean it it really affects the butters on this project or it affects people to go fishing whatever and There is no map the maps that I've seen look like a fourth grader didn't I mean We have a project like this needs to have a good topographical map Drawn so that people can understand where we I mean we try to get out to everybody in the community We held a meeting in the forks with the whole community around where you live. We had actually an eight foot long High visual aerial picture that showed exactly where every pole was on it Was laid out across the whole I was there at that meeting. Okay. Yeah, and no, I didn't see that I guess which there there were two meetings in the forks. No, I've been asked it for a topographical map Well, I'll give you my card. Let's make sure you give me my solution good idea to come here tonight because You got a one-on-one right? Well, I asked once and I didn't get a little closer. We got a smaller group I do believe we're getting towards a dead-end time at host Yeah, good. Hello. Yes, my name is that Carl Shalene and Luzden business owner a little bit Luzden a property tax payer here and You know, I would just like to offer some some comment and perhaps some perspective, you know, if I You know with anything there's going to be impacts, right? And there's going to be trade-offs, you know And if I if I told you about this wonderful idea I had that, you know, we should build this huge industrial complex on the coast You know, there might be a lot of opposition to that and then oh wait I have another great idea if we had this industry that where we would just string multicolored buoys all along the coast of Maine it might be you know, there might be some Some opposition to that but I don't think anyone could argue that bath iron works and The lobster industry has been net pot. You know while I'm sure there are impacts They have been net positives for Maine and I think this project is going to be a net positive You know, this is not you know, I think we need to you know Yes, we're going to be cutting down a really a minimal swath of land that's you know I saw the photos outside, you know The lot of the trees are already gone and yes, you know, that's forest and it will grow back But unless I'm under not understanding everything correctly as soon as the forest goes back the logging company will You know cut it back right back down again. I mean that was the whole idea and It's you know, this is you know put things in perspective. This is not a pipeline that's going to leak and I think it's Yeah, I think it's gonna be beneficial for the world at large and certainly Northern New England and you know and and for Lewiston and You know as a as a business owner, you know, you know, sometimes profit is okay It's what makes the world go around and I think it's ironic to complain about CMP and their profits You know, I'm not I'm under the impression that river tours are not free and that as they certainly must provide some Some impact to this pristine wilderness. No offense to anyone here, but just to offer some perspective. Thank you So Jeff McKay again from Skowhegan I didn't state before that I've been a recreator and the kind of a gorge since 1996 and a commuter To the forks since around 2000 2001 so everybody else that lives there tried by Ed's house Kim's house See Julie there frequently a couple questions I took the time to go out and grab your sheet and I didn't know if anywhere available Maybe in the plan and I can talk to folks At the state but at this point in time with the project so far along Is there actual footnotes to some of the figures in here or statements and if so I'm just gonna run through a few and You know, I'd be curious as far as the support from elected officials I can just you to hit them hit your targets because we're sure that's our time So figuring out who those supporters are as it relates to the hydro Quebec in providing Energy is there an agreement in place a written agreement that it will be hydro power only to meet this demand And as it relates to the new line that will also be fiber optic cable Is there a written agreement on that and if so it can we sort of get a footnote to that? And then the other piece too. I read about the New England clean power link and that project and in the cost of that project And it seems that this meets Massachusetts goal Moved away from there quite some time ago and providing, you know cost effective Alternative and I've heard figures thrown around the mitigation around this and some of the money that will go to the forks area But I imagine at this point in time I recognize that these are all hypothetical until this project is built But there seems to be some Use for this money in place and I just wonder if there's a list of those projects Trail improvements and those sorts of things these you know benefits that exist. So just so I understand Let let's go. I think back to the first one The there is an agreement in place They're both now publicly available The there's a there's two agreements one is between Hydro-Coback and the electric distribution companies in Massachusetts The where the cost will be born From the project and then there's a separate agreement between Central main power and the DCs in Massachusetts. Both of those agreements are available. They're not a probably an easy read But but they're both there. They do require very specific monitoring of the portfolio of Hydro-assets to guarantee that the power coming over is hydro The the second question was What I remember the third yeah, yeah, the third one was on. Oh, no the second one was fiber optic. Yes Yes, so there is an agreement in place that we we have to put fiber optic It's actually something that makes a ton of sense For the project we are we would have to have some amount of fiber optic on the poles anyway So what we've committed to do is provide a ton of fiber optic Cables to be able to help reinforce and maybe even serve new areas in Franklin and in Somerset counties But no bar bands or no provider. No, no So right now the commitment in in the agreement that we have is the to strip to string all 150 miles of this Additional fiber optic able to be able to serve there and potentially even connect in Quebec with the US which may have some additional benefits But we're in conversations with Franklin County and Somerset about how can we utilize that fiber optic in a way? That could bring value to the communities And then the last thing is the I think you're believe believe you're referencing the western mountains and rivers agreement and That is an agreement that's out there publicly available If you can't find it We're happy to email to you and it provides the you know some things are very specific Thumbs and some things are very general You know once you it's it's an easier document than the ones that were filed in Massachusetts It's probably 20 ish pages long We're happy if you have questions about any specific laws to Sure, no, it would be helpful for this type of event I think sure people could see that and then you know folks that might be left out would also recognize that yeah Yeah, sure. I'd be happy to let's exchange cards absolutely We'll get the topo map and we'll make sure you get the agreement. Thank you. Thank you, Joe Ed and but in any exchange you raised your hand you're not at the podium remember so Say where that's available Okay, I'll get that answer in a minute. Go ahead Ed. I seem everybody in the panel seems to be in agreement that we need to get to Carbon-free generation and electricity in the in the system and that preferably we do that by the middle of the century The West is burning the East Coast is drowning We got a lot of problems to deal with some people would say that we were facing an existential threat There are groups that are against everything There are put groups that oppose that installation of wind whether it's on a mountaintop or whether it's in the ocean There are groups that seem to be against every possible option So a question I asked for the panel is if not this project, how do we accomplish that? In the environment that we're in where people are against virtually everything. That's so you want to address that? Sorry We're not against everything There have been 30 some-odd wind power projects in New England That have come before permitting agencies We've opposed two of them in their entirety And we are not saying this project should not be built we're saying this project should be built better Spend a little extra money and do it right minimize the worst impacts In ways that are technologically and economically feasible. They're constrained by their current bid to Massachusetts It's really not our problem There are ways to get you know, we're agnostic on Quebec hydro right now I'm not saying whether it should or should not come to New England We recognize, you know the climate potential climate change benefits of it. We think they need to be better demonstrated but Spend a little extra money and minimize the worst impacts Bury the new rather than creating a new swan through this highly significant forest bury it along Existing logging roads bury it under the gorge. Spend a little extra money do it right That's all we're saying. So the idea being for against Sure, so so we are opposed to this project the Natural Resources Council of Maine is is not opposed to all projects We've supported a number of solar projects recently. We also supported the Aquaventus the main Aquaventus project, which was just sent back to the drawing board by the Public Utilities Commission here in the state of Maine and the governor So there's lots of ways to get there. There's offshore wind. There's onshore wind. There's solar. There's battery There is distributed generation. There's energy efficiency. That's how we can get there For every project you mentioned Yeah That's I would like to wrap it up But then I and I want to agree with Ed because I've been in the state house and watch CMP opposed a lot of good projects So everybody opposes something I think I'd like to put it at a wrap on that if that's okay with everyone you okay at the table here Sure He started off with one and ended with one Thank you very much gentlemen. I got one card sitting around this. I'll give it to you It was good. I'd like what you say. I'd like to apply to other programs