I-195 relocation poses big question (continued) BY BRIAN C. JONES

BUT BURYING the cables is no slam dunk, financially or technically, electric company officials say. Narragansett spokesman Frederick Mason says that after the Friends of India Point Park hired a professional engineer, the electric company agreed to take a hard look at underground alternatives. All turned out to be more expensive.

One transmission method, using "solid dielectric cable" that is run through polyvinyl chloride conduits encased in concrete, would cost $9.1 million, according to Narragansett’s Siting Board application. "High-pressure fluid-filled pipe type" cable, which runs through steel pipes, would cost $8.2 million. The difference between the $1.7 million overhead price and the underground costs thus would be around $6.5 million to $7.4 million.

In addition, Narragansett says it would have to spend an undetermined amount to buy land in East Providence and construct a small "transition" building, similar to a substation, where the conversion would be made from underground cables to the above ground lines continuing to Brayton Point.

Underground systems are difficult to repair, according to David M. Campilii, who specializes in underground engineering for National Grid USA, Narragansett’s parent company. When there is a lightening strike or some other problem on an overhead wire, the problem can usually be fixed in one to two days, Campilii says. But repairing an underground cable, accessed through manholes, may take nearly two weeks. In March, one fault in an underground system in Providence took 375 hours, and another last year took 193 hours, Narragansett officials say.

While underground cables are less susceptible to wind and other storms that plague overhead wires, utility officials say, they are affected by other forces, such as corrosion, and can even be impacted by lightening strikes. The power company also says it could take 20 to 27 months to design and build the underground system — and that’s if the permits needed from various government agencies can be acquired quickly.

The state Department of Transportation (DOT) has set a November 2005 deadline for the relocation of the power lines. Thus, if the state Energy Facility Siting Board orders the underground work by early April, the project would push tightly against the road-building schedule.

Narragansett has nonetheless said it is willing to make the wires disappear from view — if someone else foots the bill.

India Point Park supporter Riley and others say funds are available.

One source is DOT itself. Department spokeswoman Dana Alexander Nolfe confirmed DOT is willing to pay the $1.7 million cost attributed to the overhead lines, plus an $800,000 "enhancement grant," for a total $2.5 million to help bury the lines. Further, the state has awarded grants totaling $375,000 for burial of lines, according to assistant attorney general Roberti. Applying these funds against the lowest-priced underground alternative would reduce the amount still needed to about $5.3 million.

Riley says there are other pots of money that could be tapped: Narragansett has $15 million from a "settlement" of a utility case, plus a $12.8 million storm fund. He says use of the settlement funds is appropriate because sprucing up Providence would enhance economic development in a state dependent on tourism; using the storm funds would be warranted by virtue of protecting the transmission lines from bad weather.

Not so fast, says Narragansett’s Mason. The estimated $15 million fund comes from the merger in 2000 of Narragansett and the Newport and Blackstone Valley electric companies, which proposed returning Narragansett’s excess profits to customers in the spring of 2005. The storm fund, meanwhile, is just that — a contingency account for extraordinary expenses to get the system running after "an extraordinary storm," such as a hurricane, Mason says.

But Narragansett Electric — along with the state Economic Development Corporation — has proposed loosening the strings on the storm fund for economic development purposes.

Last week, it proposed a $1.4 million electricity rate reduction for the Newport Navy base, part of a state campaign to persuade the Pentagon to keep the sprawling military complex open when the Defense Department considers a new round of base closings in 2005.

Narragansett has asked the Public Utilities Commission to allow it to give the Navy a one-year credit on its current rate, with Narragansett taking the lost revenues from the storm fund. As part of the deal, the Navy would give up some of what it is to receive when Narragansett’s excess profits are returned to customers in 2005. The portion of the Navy’s refund money, not to exceed 20 percent of its discount credit, would go back to the storm fund.

It wasn’t known at deadline whether the PUC will agree to this plan. But Narragansett’s proposal for the Navy raises this question: if the storm fund can be tapped to keep the Navy in Newport, why can’t it be used to promote economic development benefits from a better looking Providence?

Mason says the economic development contributions of the Navy base, with a payroll of more than $500 million, are more tangible than the supposed benefits for Providence’s future economic development created by hiding the power lines. "There’s no verifiable data [that says] here’s what burying the lines will do," he says.

Riley counters that the economic impact of improving Providence is underscored by the success of WaterFire in attracting visitors to the city. He says it cost $60 million to revamp the city’s rivers walks — along which no utility wires are visible. The WaterFire displays, featuring moody music and pyres of fire in the river, have drawn so many viewers that spending within the city increased by an annual by $20 million.

Once the waterfront transmission lines are buried, Riley says, they will be out of sight for good, a permanent plus for economic development. But he says there’s no guarantee that trimming the Navy’s electric rates will persuade defense planners to indefinitely keep the base at Newport. "You bury the power lines, we’re good for 100 years, guaranteed," he says.

Thomas E. Deller, director of Providence Department of Planning and Development, says he knows of no studies showing that burying the power line will produce specific economic gains. But the city’s appearance, he says, can influence investors and others. "Obviously, we would like to have it done underground. Both from an atheistic and safety point, it probably would be best underground," Deller says. But he adds: "The city is in no position to contribute to the cost of putting it underground."

THERE ARE DISAGREEMENTS on a number of other fronts, including the controversial issue of the electric and magnetic fields produced by high-capacity electric lines.

Riley quotes an original environmental impact study done for the highway relocation as saying that burying the wires would produce "virtually negligible EMF."

But Campilii, the National Grid expert, says burying cables doesn’t automatically shield people from EMF. Depending on the type of instillation, levels for people standing right over the buried cables can approach those produced by overhead wires. But steel pipe systems — the lower-cost underground option listed by Narragansett — do provide more shielding from EMF, he says, and that’s what the original environmental impact statement was based on.

Riley says if the underground system lowers EMF, it will make India Point Park more attractive to potential users. Whether or not the scientific case has been settled on the health effects, Riley says, the EMF issue worries people. He points to news accounts that the Children’s Museum of Rhode Island declined to relocate from Pawtucket to India Point Park in the ’90s because of perceived public concerns about fields from the high voltage wires.

One of Narragansett’s arguments about the project is that high-voltage lines already exist and have been in place nearly a century, meaning that the public is well used to them. "It is true that people get used to things; it doesn’t mean the things are good," Riley notes, adding that it doesn’t mean the public "wouldn’t notice the difference" if the lines are put underground.

The Friends of India Point Park asserts that the new power line system will be "more of an eyesore" than the current setup.

Interstate 195 now crosses the Providence River far away from the power lines, Riley says. But the relocated bridge will bring tourists and other motorists closer to the wires. To catch views of the redeveloped downtown Providence, they will be peering through the wires, he says. Similarly, a revamped Washington Bridge over the Seekonk River, and a rebuilt pedestrian bridge to India Point Park over I-195, will also offer unwelcome views of the transmission lines. "It’s a step backward," Riley says. "It’s going to reinforce the sense of the waterfront as an industrial background."

But Mason and other Narragansett officials counter that the opposite is the case. There will be fewer towers, they say, and the lines strung across them will be less conspicuous.

THE POWER LINE DISPUTE sounds more complicated than it is, in part because heavy-duty transmission of electricity has many technical aspects. Thus, much of the debate revolves around talk of electromagnetic fields, kilovolts, high-pressure fluid-filled pipe-type cables, design and permitting, road construction schedules, and repair estimates.

But in the end, it’s a simple argument about money — probably in the area of $5 million — and most decisions about money come down to public and political support.

The anti-power line forces seem to have built up momentum, in part because of the vigorous pursuit of the case by Attorney General Lynch, whose staff is collecting file drawers full of evidence, and the activism of the Friends of India Point Park, whose Web site, www.friendsofindiapointpark.org, brims with position papers.

The Providence City Council is on record supporting burial, as is Providence Mayor David N. Cicilline. The cities of Providence and East Providence are formal interveners in the case. The Friends group has rounded up a host of other supporters, ranging from the American Institute of Architects, Rhode Island chapter — which says that burying the cables would, "Constitute a dramatic improvement to an area that is currently experiencing an important transformation" — to the West Broadway Neighborhood Association, the Conservation Law Foundation, and the Providence Tourism Council.

The next step in the case is a series of advisory opinions to be filed with the Energy Facility Siting Board by January 30, 2004, by the state departments of health, transportation, environmental management, the Statewide Planning Program, the state Division of Public Utilities and Carriers, the state Energy Office, and the Providence and East Providence planning boards.

These statements will be followed by more hearings, with a decision 60 days after the hearings start. State law requires that the siting panel approve projects "at the lowest possible cost to the consumer," and that the board ensure that projects "will not cause unacceptable harm to the environment and will enhance the socio-economic fabric of the state."

Such language seems to allow decision-makers plenty of wiggle room.

They can either decide the issue on narrow technical grounds — whether the cheaper aboveground relocation of wires isn’t really much of a change at all, and the project should go on as planned. Or they can conclude there’s so much public interest and political momentum, that in the long run, the more costly and complex underground system is worthwhile.

Ultimately, though, the decision will reflect how strongly Rhode Islanders feel about what visitors and residents alike see when they show up at the capital city’s front door.

Brian C. Jones can be reached at brijudy@ids.net