Your cart is currently empty!

Kansas Fights Back Against Federal NIETC Transmission Corridor Plans: Urges Others to do the same
SPRINGFIELD COLORADO – The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (NIETC) initiative has ignited widespread concern across Southeast Colorado, with landowners, local officials, and advocacy groups pushing back against the federal plan that could reshape the region’s agricultural and economic landscape.
The fight against the NIETC corridor in Southeast Colorado directly ties into the concerns we raised in our January 27, 2024, article on balancing energy progress with property rights. As we reported, landowners in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Colorado have been raising alarms about the DOE’s top-down approach to energy infrastructure, which prioritizes federal expansion over local control. The developments in Kansas demonstrate that grassroots resistance and local government action can be powerful tools in pushing back against federal overreach. With Colorado now in the crosshairs, it’s critical that residents in Colorado, New Mexico and Oklahoma follow Kansas’ lead by mobilizing county commissioners, demanding public transparency, and urging lawmakers to protect private property rights before irreversible damage is done to our agricultural communities.
The proposed corridors, stretching between five and fifteen miles wide, are part of a federal effort to enhance energy transmission infrastructure and facilitate the movement of renewable energy across the nation. However, residents in Baca and Prowers Counties argue that the project will cause irreversible damage to family farms, ranches, and local businesses.
The federal government’s push for National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs) has faced significant resistance in Kansas, where lawmakers, landowners, and advocacy groups worked feverishly to block the project. In December 2024 COE withdrew the NIETC corridor through Kansas. Only three projects remain of the original 10.
ABOVE: In May 2024 during Phase 1 of the NIETC designation process, DOE identified a preliminary list of ten potential NIETC corridors across the nation. The Midwest-Plains corridor in Kansas would have connected with the already approved Grain Belt Express, linking Kansas to a power transmission line stretching east through Missouri and Illinois to western Indiana.

ABOVE: Remaining 3 NIETC Corridors. December 2024
The controversy surrounding the transmission corridor has intensified in other areas including New Mexico, Southeast Colorado and the Oklahoma Panhandle as residents argue that it violates state authority, threatens private property rights, and undermines local economies.
Senator Jerry Moran and Representative Tracey Mann have introduced legislation aimed at protecting Kansas landowners from federal overreach. The bill, known as the “Protecting Our Land from Federal Overreach Act of 2024,” seeks to prohibit the use of eminent domain for transmission line projects, ensuring that landowners cannot be forced to give up their property for federally backed projects.
“This is a clear violation of state rights,” said Representative Troy Waymaster. “The DOE is circumventing the Kansas Corporation Commission’s authority, which has traditionally regulated energy projects within our state.”
Opposition to the NIETC designation has been further strengthened by county resolutions rejecting the project. The Barton County Kansas and Brown County Kansas Commissioners passed resolutions condemning the DOE’s failure to adequately notify residents and address concerns about economic impacts. The resolutions argue that the transmission lines would remove valuable farmland from production, leading to a decline in tax revenue and harming local communities.
At the heart of the controversy is the DOE’s ability to invoke eminent domain, forcing landowners to sell or lease their property if they refuse voluntary agreements. The Kansas Farm Bureau has also spoken out against the project, warning that the transmission corridors could set a dangerous precedent for future federal land seizures.
With the public comment period set to close on February 14, Kansas officials and advocacy groups are urging residents to voice their opposition. Public meetings are being held to inform landowners of their rights and guide them through the process of submitting formal objections.
Call to Action: Push for an Extension
Time is running out to submit public comments unless action is taken to extend the deadline. Kansas Senators Jerry Moran and Roger Marshall successfully pushed the DOE to extend the public comment period for their state, but the same has not been done for Colorado. Without media coverage or clear public notification, many affected residents remain unaware of the looming deadline.
Colorado residents are urged to contact their federal representatives immediately and request that they advocate for an extension of the comment period.
Colorado Legislators to Contact:
- Senator John Hickenlooper – (202) 224-5941 | hickenlooper.senate.gov
- Senator Michael Bennet – (202) 224-5852 | bennet.senate.gov
- Rep. Lauren Boebert (CO-03, covering SE Colorado) – (202) 225-4761 | boebert.house.gov
Residents can submit public comments by emailing NIETC@hq.doe.gov or through the Federal Register.
The fight is far from over, but with strong local opposition and legislative efforts underway, landowners hope to prevent what they see as an unjust federal takeover of their land.
More Resources:
The Herald received the following letter from Beth Salmans in Marysville, KS which she sent to parties in New Mexico on the process in Kansas:

“I am Beth Salmans from Marysville, KS. I got involved in fighting for private property rights issues when I found out that there was a National Heritage Area study being conducted on 49 counties in Kansas and Nebraska. My county of Marshall was included in what would be the Kansas Nebraska National Heritage Area. This would place federal jurisdiction on all 49 counties that would subject landowners to federal laws, rules and regulations. They list the Antiquities Act, Endangered Species Act and Environmental Protection Act as their favorites. I asked my daughter how we could fight this, and she took off. We conducted a series of 10 meetings throughout the 49 counties with the help of Norman Kincaide of Colorado. He had fought one off in southeastern Colorado. We used his method of going county to county obtaining resolutions opposing the federal designation. We also had letter templates directed to the officials who were in charge of the project that we handed out at our meetings. People sent them in, and they stood as opposition to the project. They also showed a lack of grassroots support for the project. The feasibility study that is required for all federal projects must show there is a need and grassroots support for the project. The resolutions and letters showed the lack of grassroots support, and we were able to stop the project.
I got involved in fighting the NIETC “proposed” transmission corridors, Midwest Plains and Southwest Plains that would have allowed a 5-mile-wide swath of land to be taken out of production and cut our state in half. The land would be taken from private landowners by eminent domain if they did not agree to sell. In Kansas, the Kansas Corporation Commission, by law, approves or disapproves all transmission line construction. This plan was originally put out in the form of rules and regulations, however when sued the DOE lost. The judge admonished them saying that it was a egregious overreach by the federal government and a gross misuse of the federal power of eminent domain. That is when they scurried around and pushed it into the Infrastructure and Jobs Act, a huge omnibus bill that was passed. That made it law of the land as designed and submitted. That included a clause to allow the federal government to bypass the KCC if they had not approved the project within a year and the government was authorized to use federal power of eminent domain to obtain the land they coveted for their project. The reason eminent domain was brought in is because the DOE claims the grid is unstable, intermittent and in danger of collapse due to the amount of energy required to run the big data centers that are growing massively across the country. This led them to declare a National Emergency leading to the classification of National Security Risk bringing in the power of eminent domain. While they claim the nation needs massive amounts of new energy, they are slow walking and completely shutting down permitting of our natural resources such as gas, oil, coal and nuclear power. That is what is causing an emergency in need of immediate “government” action. I maintain that nuclear power is the cleanest and most reliable of all “green” energy. They now have a nuclear power plant that makes 3 Mile Island look like a giant. It is compact and doesn’t have large stacks present in current plants. Great strides have been made and are still being made in this area. Westinghouse has designed the AP-300 nuclear energy plant that is very small and does not have big stacks attached to it. The cost is very reasonable to allow a county to have one if they want.
I found out about this project about June 15 and the open comment period expired on June 24. I began the fight as I saw it as another land grab, much like the NHA was. I confirmed with several newspapers in counties along the path and they had not received any notification about an open comment period, as is required by law. Our senators, Marshall and Moran were successful in getting the public comment period re-opened so that the public had a chance to comment on the project. I started getting information to all commissioners in all counties along the path of the corridors. Not one was aware of the project so that showed how the DOE was operating in the dark. I also contacted my state and federal officials to get information on the project and no one was aware of it. Sen. Marshall’s aid told me to check with KCC, so I did. KCC asked for information on the project, so I sent the link to their website. The gal checked with her director who was unaware of it and gave her a link to information on it to send to me. It was the same link that I sent them! For 2 and a half months, I was in a commission meeting every Monday. I was even able to do 2 meetings in a day for a couple of the Mondays. Meanwhile, word had spread from a meeting I spoke at 3 days after finding out about it and personally contacting several commissioners in that first week. That is when the meetings started to get information out. The resolutions started coming in and I got them in the hands of the officials who needed them. State and Federal Representatives, Senators, KCC, DOE, Grid Deployment Office, Kansas A.G. and others. The people rose to say no and we were very happy that on Dec. 16, 2024, the DOE announced that Kansas would not be “chosen” (as opposed to asked) for development. The bad news is that they chose our neighboring states. I am telling you all of this to show you how to fight this in your state.
While I am not aware of New Mexico laws, I figured this would give you a start. I also do not know whether any of the energy will be dropped in New Mexico. I am figuring probably not unless you have laws requiring it like Missouri does. If not, then there is another great opposition point.

I have a compilation of health studies given to me 2 days after I found out about this and I also found another full study authorized in 1992, finished in 1998. I will send the entire study, and I have pulled out the conclusion which is the most important part. It contradicts itself in several instances and in conclusion they agree that there is a risk to health in the form of cancer and reproduction but not to the point of having to go to expensive changes and labeling transmission lines as “Hazardous Materials” but that more studies are warranted. The problem is finding more updated studies. They have either not been done or are buried. These lines will carry the most energy in the history of our state and, I have been told, the country. Until more studies are completed, we have to treat them as hazardous.
In Kansas, Congressman Ron Estes and Senator Jerry Moran have released official statements opposing the NIETC Corridors plan which I have been able to download. Dr. Marshall has also released a statement but it is not available to be downloaded that I can find. Congressman Tracy Mann is also opposing this and was the first on board to do so. They have also introduced House and Senate bills. Congressman Tracy Mann introduced H.R. 9527, named “Protecting Our Land from Federal Overreach Act of 2024” on September 10, 2024. While I greatly appreciate that our federal legislators are getting on board with this fight, I fear that they will be unable to accomplish removing eminent domain from the original bill and restore the permitting of any new transmission lines to the KCC as required by Kansas law. The bills they are proposing are great, however, they must get this through the House, Senate and signed by the White House. The DOE is trying to push this project through as fast as it can, and you know how slow the legislative process is. The problem is that the bills were introduced in the 118th Congress and the 119th is in place now so they will have to reintroduce them. It can take forever to get a bill passed as it goes to committee(s) and has to be voted out to the floor. Then when passed they will go to the other side of Congress to go through the same procedure. I am hoping the new administration is going to halt the process if they can in order to give us more time for legislation. That is why we must work locally with the representatives who are the closest to the people, our county commissioners and your local state representatives and senators. I will send these documents along with Senator Josh Hawley’s statements. These might help you since you don’t have support from your New Mexico delegation.
That is why I go county to county along the corridors contacting and meeting with county commissioners. I am asking them to pass a resolution opposing the use of their county for these transmission corridors. It poses health risks as well as running generational farmers and ranchers off their land and those who have started operations or just built their dream home in the country. It will absolutely devastate the local economies, especially local businesses that are dependent upon our largest industry, agriculture. With a 5 mile stretch of land crossing through a county it removes a large tax base. I also have letters that every individual in a household, business, organization, etc. can sign and mail to 2 separate individuals associated with this project, one being the DOE Director, Jennifer Granholm.
The templates/suggested text Beth mentions above are as follows:
Letter Template #1
Director Mary Sotos
Federal Energy Management Program
U.S. Department of Energy
3H-370, 1000 Independence Ave., SW
Washington, D.C. 20585-0121
Dear Director Mary Sotos,
This letter serves to inform you that I am vehemently opposed to the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designation Project.
The Department of Energy’s is intending to create a massive corridor of 5 miles wide, 780 miles long in the Midwest Plains section of the NIETC, from less than 5 miles wide to near 100 miles wide, 220 miles long in the Plains Southwest section of the NIETC, 4 – 18 miles wide, 645 miles long in the Delta Plains section of the NIETC, and the 20 -100 miles wide, 540 miles long in the Mountain Plains Southwest section of the NIETC.
No person or government agency has the right to use my private property to benefit non-competitive private partners of the federal government. No person or government agency has the right to use my private property to provide energy to consumers in other states with no benefit to my state or myself without my consent.
By removing this amount of valuable homes, farm and ranch land out of my county’s tax base you will be devastating our ability to provide necessary services such as maintaining roads and bridges, funding school districts, funding law enforcement and fire services, etc.
By taking our private property you will be removing our ability to support our families. You will put us out of our businesses that have been built over generations of hard working families who settled and cared for this land or who have built them over years of hard work.
You cannot guarantee that there are no health risks to our environment by pollutants that can penetrate land and water.
I request to view all studies as required by the National Environmental Policy Act involved in moving this project to fruition such as, the Feasibility, Environmental Impact, Historical Preservation and Economic Impact.
Respectfully,
Letter Template #2:
Secretary Jennifer Granholm
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave. SW
Washington D.C. 20585
Dear Secretary Jennifer Granholm,
This letter serves to inform you that I am vehemently opposed to the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designation Project.
The Department of Energy’s is intending to create a massive corridor of 5 miles wide, 780 miles long in the Midwest Plains section of the NIETC, less than 5 miles wide to near 100 miles wide, 220 miles long in the Plains Southwest section of the NIETC, 4 – 18 miles wide, 645 miles long in the Delta Plains section of the NIETC, and the 20 -100 miles wide, 540 miles long in the Mountain Plains Southwest section of the NIETC.
No person or government agency has the right to use my private property to benefit non-competitive private partners of the federal government. No person or government agency has the right to use my private property to provide energy to consumers in other states with no benefit to my state or myself without my consent.
By removing this amount of valuable homes, farm and ranch land out of my county’s tax base you will be devastating our ability to provide necessary services such as maintaining roads and bridges, funding school districts, funding law enforcement and fire services, etc.
By taking our private property you will be removing our ability to support our families. You will put us out of our businesses that have been built over generations of hard working families who settled and cared for this land or who have built them over years of hard work.
You cannot guarantee that there are no health risks to our environment by pollutants that can penetrate land and water.
I request to view all studies as required by the National Environmental Policy Act involved in moving this project to fruition such as, the Feasibility, Environmental Impact, Historical Preservation and Economic Impact.
Respectfully,
Keep Local News Alive Subscribe to the Plainsman Herald Here:

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.