When San Diego Gas & Electric Co. files an amended plan for its proposed Sunrise Powerlink transmission line, it will face an array of groups set to challenge the company's assertions of why the 120-mile "energy superhighway" is needed.

The groups are preparing to contest the company's request for permission to build a high voltage line from Imperial County to San Diego on several fronts, including issues of reliability of service, the link to geothermal and solar energy, and the underlying economics of the request.

One of those groups is the 17,000-member San Diego chapter of the Sierra Club, which sees the proposal as an avenue to spur fundamental changes in how energy policies are decided in the region.

"There's definitely an opportunity here to create a new way of doing things," said Paul Blackburn, chairman of the Sierra Club's energy committee. "Instead of being reactive to proposals such as this, we need to be able to sit down together and talk about what our power needs really are and how we are going to get the power in the future."

SDG&E says Sunrise Powerlink would help deliver 1,000 megawatts of electricity to SDG&E's existing 1.3 million customers in San Diego County and southern Orange County, boosting the regional power supply by about 25 percent to help meet future demand. One megawatt is enough to power about 1,000 homes.

By the end of July, SDG&E is expected to file an amended application for the line, including a preliminary environmental assessment.

What it wants

The company says it needs the more than $1 billion Sunrise Powerlink in order to assure a reliable power supply, to transport renewable energy sources in Imperial County and meet the San Diego region's expected population growth through the year well into the next decade.

It rejects contentions that the 500,000-volt line is really an attempt to capture power from its parent company Sempra Energy's power plant in Mexicali and import that power for sale in areas beyond its existing service territory in San Diego and Orange counties.

SDG&E contends its future power supply needs are constrained by having a single 500,000-volt line running to power generators to the east, and a 230,000-volt line connecting its grid to the San Onofre nuclear power plant north of Oceanside. It argues that among large electric service areas in California, San Diego is the only region with such a limited transmission network.

SDG&E further says that when power demands peak, such as during hot summer days, its existing lines are nearing "energy gridlock" and that such congestion results in millions of dollars of additional charges, fees that are passed on to its customers.

Approval of Sunrise Powerlink would give the company what it says is an overdue third connection to the state's energy grid.

Challengers

Six local groups have been granted "intervenor" status in the Sunrise case by the California Public Utilities Commission, the state agency governed by a five-member board that will ultimately rule on the project.

Intervenors are individuals or groups deemed by the commission to have sufficient standing to represent the overall public interest in energy proposals.

Besides the Sierra Club, the commission has granted intervenor status to the Center for Biological Diversity, the Utility Consumers' Action Network and the Community Alliance for Sensible Energy.

In addition, the Ramona Alliance Against Sunrise Powerlink and the Rancho Penasquitos Concerned Citizens, two neighborhood groups formed specifically in opposition to elements of the proposal, also have been given intervenor status.

By getting the designation, each of the groups has standing to challenge the proposal and make its arguments at every step of the proposal. And each also is eligible for state funding to reimburse their costs in hiring their own experts and preparing their formal testimony before the commission.

Five plan to challenge the line on issues relating to environment, public health and community values. The sixth, the Utility Consumers' Action Network, is focusing on the economics of the line.

The combined estimated cost of their intervention has been estimated by the state at more than $1.8 million.

Ratepayer advocate

SDG&E's customers will have another voice in examining all the issues emanating from Sunrise Powerlink, the public utility commission's Division of Ratepayer Advocates.

"Our concern is the overall cost as well as the overall need for this type of project," said Scott Logan, a regulatory analyst assigned to the ratepayer advocate branch. "We will look at the economic and power reliability issues and the overall need for the line."

Based on SDG&E's initial proposal, Logan said he anticipates the ratepayer advocate section will focus on the power reliability arguments the company is making as part of its justification for the line and the renewable energy issues it raises.

While some may view the office as a kind of fox guarding the henhouse, Logan pointed out that it opposed SDG&E's Valley Rainbow Interconnect, a 500,000-volt line the company wanted to build that would have connected a Riverside County electrical substation in Romoland to an SDG&E substation in Rainbow.

That 2001 proposal drew widespread opposition, and the commission ruled in December 2002 that SDG&E failed to conclusively show a need for the line.

"In that case, we opposed the project on the failure of the company to demonstrate the need and instead recommended that alternative generation projects be pursued," Logan said.

The Division of Ratepayer Advocates will hire its own independent consultant who may ultimately also serve as its spokesman in commission hearings.

Key issues

The groups aligned to contest the Sunrise Powerlink are focusing their efforts on whether SDG&E really needs the line that would stretch from El Centro in Imperial County through Anza-Borrego Desert State Park and pass through Ramona, Scripps Ranch and Rancho Penasquitos.

They question whether the company can get the power supply reliability it says it needs from existing generation facilities within the county and whether the region and its political leaders are doing enough to promote solar and wind power generation possibilities within the county.

A regional energy strategy prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments in 2003 was succinct in that regard.

"Combining the plentiful solar resources of San Diego with the geothermal and wind resources nearby to the east and the south, the region should be able to achieve increased use of renewable resources with little difficulty," the report states. "For this reason, a preference toward clean energy options should become policy."

UCAN

The intervenor group hoping to sunset Sunrise Powerlink before it ever gets off the ground through detailed technical analysis and argument is the San Diego-based Utility Consumers' Action Network. The group is employing a team of consultants that is examining the need for Sunrise and alternatives, and is expected to deliver a report soon.

Bill Powers, a mechanical engineer working with the network, contended that construction of a roughly 700-megawatt power plant in San Diego County would eliminate the reliability issue raised by SDG&E for the next 15 years, even if the company's claim it faces an impending shortage is accurate.

He also said last week that producing more power from existing plants at Duke Energy's South Bay power plant in National City and the Encina power plant in Carlsbad also would provide enough energy to meet electrical needs for the next decade.

Powers pointed to the regional energy plan as a document that should carry a lot of weight as the state makes its decision on Sunrise.

"This is the first time that something big has been put on the table since the plan was written, so this is where the rubber is hitting the road," he said. "The Sunrise proposal is not a part of that plan."

Powers argued that much of SDG&E's justifications for the power line cannot be supported, and he suggested that if the commission concludes there is a need for the line, it should be constructed immediately adjacent to the Southwest Powerlink line.

But Powers said he believes SDG&E ultimately will not be able to prove the need for the line. Southwest Powerlink has an been "extremely reliable" transmission line, and that there are a myriad of options to meet increases in power demand.

"You can always manufacture the need for this type of line, but when you examine it closely the justification just isn't there," he said. "It's a power struggle, but we're going to beat this thing because it's a turkey."

Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.

Next steps

June 20: SDG&E to submit status report revisions to initial Sunrise Powerlink application.

July: Amended application including a preliminary environmental assessment.

Sept. 13: Tentative date for pre-hearing conference with the California Public Utilities Commission.

Late 2007: Decision on Sunrise application.

2008-10: Construction begins if application approved.

2010: Sunrise Powerlink slated to go into service.

Web resources

www.sdge.com/sunrisepowerlink

www.cpuc.ca.gov

www.ucan.org

www.sdenergy.org