SunZia Status (historical):

• Rehearing Application on decision to grant SunZia's CEC

  On March 11, 2017, Peter Else filed an application with the Arizona Corporation Commission for a rehearing of Decision #75464, the decision which granted SunZia a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility (CEC).



• SunZia must now invite comment from Participating Stakeholders on the Plan of Development. CWG released our official comments on May 3rd 2017


• Reference: Arizona Corporation Commission SunZia info page (documents, decisions, etc)


• Significant Regulatory Events:
  • Arizona Corporation Commission approved CEC (Certificate of Environmental Compatibility) on February 3rd, 2016
    vote: 3-2
  
  
  • Arizona Corporation Commission Line Siting Committee voted 8-0 (1 abstention) in support of issuing SunZia a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility
  
  
  • [Federal] Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released its Record of Decision on Jan 23rd, 2015
    This gave the SunZia project federal-level approval and decided its selected route. See CWG's Press Release
  
  
• The Dept of Defense had objected to SunZia's proposed lines across the northern end of the White Sands missle range. SunZia has agreed to bury sections of the lines over a 5 mile stretch. Read CWG's report on the cost and time required to bury the lines here.
  
  The BLM is will now need to conduct a supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, which will take at least until next Spring, or longer.


• A formal Coalition Protest of the FEIS and Resource Management Plan Amendments was submitted on June 14, 2013. See the Latest News (June 2013) page for reactions.


• CWG released an important report (02/2013): SunZia: An Unnecessary High-Risk Project? A response to the report "Evaluating the SunZia Transmission Line Proposal A Guide for Stakeholders and Decision Makers "


• The BLM's DEIS (draft environmental impact statement, 05/2012) recommended a route for the proposed project that runs along the west side of the San Pedro Valley
  
  CWG's response:

  Recommendation: The No Action Alternative We strongly recommend that the "No Action" alternative is the only acceptable decision for this project. This recommendation is based upon the following: 1. The magnitude of the environmental values that must be sacrificed to complete this project 2. The sound and compelling alternatives that exist to achieve its stated objectives 3. The economic factors that make building this project untenable The fact that solid, more economically feasible alternatives are available to achieve this project’s purported goals supports our recommendation, as does the fact that this project cannot be profitably built. This project is also greatly muddled by having been specifically proposed to provide transmission capacity for the project proponent’s own yet-to-be-built 1,000-MW natural gas-fired power plant. While we document this fact and take issue with the project’s stated purpose and need, the following review focuses more on whether this stated purpose and need can be met in other, more efficient ways.

• Shaky economic footing. Could SunZia go bankrupt?

The Working Group has composed a detailed letter explaining the reasons behind the high likelihood that the SunZia project will fail financially.  This letter has been sent to the Department of Energy and relevant leaders in Washington (and elsewhere) to persuade them to both rescind stimulus funding and to abort “fast tracking” requested by the Obama administration.

• California governor told the Western Electricity Coordinating Council that no renewable energy imports are needed.  Where is SunZia’s market?

…not that SunZia offers “primarily renewable” energy now or in the probable future.  But California has a robust in-state market for renewable energy and sufficient in-state renewable resources to serve its entire electricity needs. Read the letter from the Senior Advisor to the [California] Governor for Renewable Energy Facilities to the WECC.

• BLM has been petitioned to correct the SunZia project’s scoping description.  Has SunZia green-washed itself for political appeal?

Their misleading marketing campaign, stating that it will transmit ‘primarily renewable’ electricity is the subject of an Information Quality Act Petition by our local [Redington and Winkleman] NRCDs

UPDATE-->the NRCDs have received word that the BLM has been asked to change text on their SunZia webpage (for details see our NRCD Petition page).

• Obama administration faces opposition in its plan to “fast-track” several powerline projects including SunZia
• SunZia has requested approximately $1/4 billion in federal loan guarantees from the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA). 

SunZia project manager, Tom Wray, categorically stated at the Cascabel Community Center on January 13th, 2010, that "Not One Red Cent" of taxpayer monies would go toward the project. Ironically, should SunZia go bankrupt, it would not have to repay "one red cent" of these funds, as happened with the failed Solyndra Project.

• SunZia spent $269,000 lobbying Washington, in 2011 alone
• Arizona SB1517 was defeated – SunZia’s failed attempt to bypass the Arizona Corporation Commission’s line siting process

The Southwestern Power Group's (SWPG) sole reason for proposing SunZia and championing it, grew out of SWPG's need for transmission capacity for its gas fired, non-renewable, Bowie power plant (see Mick Meader's report). SWPG was very open about this and had this plan approved by the Southwest Area Transmission Planning Group (SWAT). When this wouldn't work with investors and SWPG decided to extend the line to central New Mexico, SWPG deliberately hid its intentions and need from the federal government to sell the project as a "renewable project". This is where the problems begin...

• Do we need both SunZia and Southline? See our Comment to the BLM on the Southline Project

  "It thus seems imprudent and duplicative to build both systems."

• Southline is a modern, environmentally aware project which has sought community feedback from the start (see one of their fliers, and also Mick Meader's report.)
• Scoping for the Southline Project should being sometime before July 2012. They now have a page on the BLM website
• SunZia is an adversarial, old-school corporation which attempts to force its agenda on the public using political power (see our lobbying page and our Arizona Senate Bill 1547 page as examples) and clever, if not outright deceiving, public campaigns (see Information Quality Act Petition in the September and July news sections). Are they truly operating in the best interest of the public?

• January 13th, Cascabel Community Center - watch SunZia project manager Tom Wray categorically state that no taxpayer money will fund SunZia. Click here.
• Taxpayer monies now funding SunZia:
  • Land leases on federal land that SunZia may pass through are subsidized by the taxpayers. See this article by Peter Else.
  • A misleading "green" campaign, promoted by the BLM (i.e., taxpayers). (see Information Quality Act Petition),
  • An application submitted for approximately $1/4 billion in federal loan guarantees from the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA)