I think it may be important to send more letters to the Senators on this committee (see below). It should also be important to find out if the Manchin Administration will offer testimony in opposition to NIETC.
JBK
"Vivian Stockman" vivian@ohvec.org 3/10/2008 10:32 AM >>>
Senate to weigh DOE's power to overrule states Law allows agency to dictate placement of power lines http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08069/863024-58.stm
Sunday, March 09, 2008 By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Opponents of a high-voltage power line project in Washington and Greene counties have received encouraging news.
Last week, the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said it would hold hearings to review how the U.S. Department of Energy is implementing its controversial transmission corridor program.
The program allows the federal government to overrule state decisions about placement of electric transmission lines. It allows property to be taken for the lines using eminent domain, and has faced harsh criticism in recent months.
Also new on the power line front, the state Public Utility Commission will begin evidentiary hearings March 24 on the application of Greensburg-based Allegheny Power to build the Pennsylvania portion of a proposed 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line. The line would extend from Washington and Greene counties in Pennsylvania to existing substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia.
Allegheny's 210-mile portion of the line would cost $820 million to build, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. The smaller portion of the line would be constructed and paid for by Dominion Virginia Power, which serves customers in Virginia.
Allegheny Power, calling the project the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, has already provided the PUC with testimony from 19 witnesses, while a local opposition group, the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania, has responded with three experts.
The company is facing challenges from more than just local groups, though.
Company testimony regarding the need for the power line so far has been rebutted by two witnesses for the Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate, and from a supervisor from the PUC Office of Trial Staff, who called the application "premature at best."
PUC Supervisor Gary Yocca questioned Allegheny Power's application after analysis, testifying that the company had not yet done enough to merit approval of the application.
Mr. Yocca said that while the company says the new power line is needed to address anticipated local system failures and brownouts within the next several years, he questioned whether there could be less costly and intrusive methods.
He said the company failed to follow through on an assessment of the environmental impact of the project and apparently no federal or state agency examined the project. Mr. Yocca said there are questions about the effects on farmland, forest land, plants and wildlife, and the significance for historic and archaeological sites.
Other consequences loom
And, while he took note of local residents' objections to the scenic dilemma presented by high-voltage transmission towers, Mr. Yocca warned of far more serious consequences.
In his testimony, Mr. Yocca reminded PUC board members of the longwall coal mining operations peppering Washington and Greene counties and of the susceptible limestone ground structure.
He said the 125-foot to 150-foot transmission towers could be affected by future mining operations or mine subsidence.
"If subsidence occurs under a [high voltage transmission line] tower, the results could be catastrophic," he said.
Allegheny Energy spokesman David Neurohr said the company will address rebuttal testimony from the PUC and other sources during the evidentiary hearings.
"That will be the process," he said. "That is what they are for."
Will Burns, a lawyer with the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania, said his group is gearing up for the fight against the power company and said he appreciates the work by Pennsylvania's state and national legislative delegations.
He said the decision by the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to hold hearings "was indicative of how important Pennsylvania legislators think this is."
A team of 38 Democratic state legislators, led by state House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese, recently urged the Senate committee to investigate the implementation of a provision in the Energy Act of 2005 that gives the federal government jurisdiction over what has traditionally been state land-use decisions.
Mr. DeWeese's letter to the committee came on the heels of one sent by U.S. Sen. Bob Casey earlier last month.
Energy law at issue
Pennsylvania, along with a number of states, has objected to the Department of Energy designating a large swath of the Northeast and parts of the Southwest as a national interest electric transmission corridor -- or NIETC.
The Mid-Atlantic designation in the Northeast, which encompasses eight states, the District of Columbia, and 50 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties, means the federal government will have the right to overrule state decisions involving the location of electric transmission lines and to take private property through eminent domain for such projects.
If a state denies a construction permit to a power company, makes no decision within a year, or places too many restrictions on the company, it would have the right to seek a permit from the federal government if the project is within a NIETC.
Already, Southern California Edison has asked federal regulators to approve the siting of a 500-kilovolt electric transmission line through Arizona after that state denied approval last year, saying it didn't want to be an "extension cord for California."
Late last month, a vice president for Dominion Virginia Power testified that the company would not rule out seeking federal intervention if state approval is denied.
Mr. Casey has become the national voice against the large regional corridors, which critics say defy the intent of the law -- to address electric reliability and congestion after the 2003 blackout in the northeast U.S.
Senators, governors and others have proposed that the corridors be of reasonable size and include critically congested areas in need of transmission and new generation. Local groups have expressed concern that Western Pennsylvania's relatively cheap coal-fired electricity will be shipped to the power-starved East Coast.
Senate to air concerns
Mr. Casey and other legislators have tried obstructing and amending the law to no avail. Mr. Casey even threatened to delay the renomination of Joseph Kelliher, Federal Energy Regulatory Committee chairman, to block implementation of the NIETC.
The most serious concerns raised by officials include the failure by the DOE to consult with states before the final NIETC designation and to assess transmission needs and alternatives.
Another major concern was the lack of alterations to the draft NIETC proposals last year. After more than 2,000 comments from the public, along with state and local officials, the DOE published the final designation with only token changes.
Last month, Mr. Casey sent a letter signed by 14 other senators to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, urging Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico, ranking member Pete Domenici, R-New Mexico, to delve further into how the transmission corridor program is being administered.
Last week, Leon Lowery, a member of the professional staff for the committee, said there would be a hearing on the NIETC issues.
"There will be a number of hearings on electricity issues," he said. "Among those things are the corridor issues."
Mr. Lowery said there has been no schedule set yet for the hearings, but that the transmission corridors would likely not receive a separate hearing.
Janice Crompton can be reached at jcrompton@post-gazette.com or 724-223-0156. First published on March 9, 2008 at 12:00 am