Power Lines in Northern Virginia

Section 216(a) also authorizes DOE to designate certain regions where transmission congestion and constraint problems adversely affect consumers as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (National Corridors). The following excerpt from a FAQ document on DOE’s Web site provides DOE's explanation of a National Corridor designation:

These designations serve as an important indication by the federal government that, at a regional level, a significant transmission constraint or congestion problem exists – one that is adversely affecting consumers and that has advanced to the point where we have a national interest in alleviating it. In other words, the federal government is not dictating how the states, regions, transmission providers or electric utilities should meet their energy challenges. It is a way of focusing attention on the areas of the country that are most congested – and whose consumers stand to benefit most from alleviation of it. On a more specific level, the designation of a National Corridor is a necessary first step in providing the federal government – through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission – siting authority that supplements existing state authority.

After conducting its congestion study in August 2006, DOE published draft National Corridor designations in April 2007 and, after a public comment period, published finalized corridor designations in October 2007. There were two National Corridors designated by DOE, one in the Southwest portion of the country and the other in the Mid-Atlantic region (as outlined in the attached map). The Mid-Atlantic region includes much of Northern Virginia, including the 10th District.

Also in April 2007, Dominion Virginia Power announced plans for a new 500 kv transmission line through Northern Virginia connecting with a line from West Virginia. The Dominion line must be approved by the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC), the agency in Virginia that regulates electric utilities. In conjunction with this request, Allegheny Power filed a similar request for a line in West Virginia to connect with the line being built by Dominion in Virginia. The Allegheny Power line must be approved by the West Virginia Public Service Commission (PSC), the West Virginia equivalent of Virginia's SCC. The approval process for both lines is currently ongoing with a decision expected in the Dominion case in April 2008.

Because this line will fall within a National Transmission Corridor designated by DOE, a denial by the Virginia SCC in the Dominion case would allow Dominion to seek approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to build the line. If FERC then approved the line, their decision would override the Virginia SCC's denial.

I am opposed to Dominion’s proposal for a new transmission line in Virginia, and I opposed the inclusion of the 10th district by DOE in the Mid-Atlantic National Transmission Corridor. Here are some of my concerns:

• I cannot emphasize enough the historic, environmental, scenic and cultural importance of the lands within the 10th district section of the corridor boundaries. This region includes rural and conservation areas, federal and state recognized historic districts, historic sites and scenic byways, agricultural and forest districts, state parks, the Appalachian Trail, the Shenandoah River, and many Civil War battlefield parks. I am opposed to new transmission lines that would endanger this exceptional region.
• Designation of a National Corridor skews economic incentives toward the building of large transmission facilities as opposed to generation close to load centers, upgrading existing lines, robust demand side management programs or investment in next generation smart grid technologies. The language of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires DOE to consider alternatives to National Corridors to deal with congestion, but DOE has interpreted that language only to mean that it will consider alternative boundaries for National Corridors.
• I am concerned that the National Corridor designation gives FERC too much power to override the siting decisions of states without providing adequate justification.
• Citizens did not have an adequate opportunity to be heard when DOE originally established the corridors. The public meetings required citizens to take off a day of work and drive hours to speak for just two minutes, and their comments, like mine, did not qualify us to petition for rehearing.

I continue to work with a bipartisan group of colleagues to push legislation to deal with these concerns, and will work diligently to ensure that we explore all solutions to our energy needs. I support investing in our nation's energy future. That doesn't mean just looking at the least expensive or most expedient solution for today. I know the Department of Energy is investing millions of dollars to find solutions, but the designation of gigantic transmission corridors, without even looking at viable alternatives, does not allow our country to capitalize on that investment.

For more information, please see the reference documents and timeline below, or don’t hesitate to contact my office to ask a question or share your thoughts.

• Department of Energy FAQ about National Electric Transmission Corridors (from DOE's website)
• Organizations concerned about National Electric Transmission Corridors