About 250 opponents of the Potomac Appalachian Transmission Highline, or PATH project, filled the Lovettsville, Va., community center to voice their concerns.

Alexander Skirpan Jr., senior hearing examiner for the Virginia State Corporation Commission, listened to respondents who had signed up in advance to speak at the event. About 20 spoke during a two-hour period, including attorneys for the commission, Sierra Club members, Loudoun County government and Allegheny Energy officials.

The nearly 300-mile, $1.8 billion project would begin in West Virginia, cross part of Virginia and Maryland, and end in a planned substation near Mount Airy . The project is a joint venture of Allegheny Energy and American Electric Power.

Much of the argument against the plan centered the rejection of the PATH application in Maryland and a recommendations to dismiss the case by both Virginia and West Virginia staffs to their respective utility oversight commissions.

In Maryland, Allegheny Energy said in October that it would state its intent on what it planned to do. Mark Nitowski, a manager for external communications for the utility company, said Thursday that the company intends to re-file its PATH application in Maryland by the end of the year.

The application's rejection by the Maryland Public Service Commission was a legal issue -- is should have been filed under the name of Potomac Edison, not PATH Allegheny LLC, as the latter is not a power generating entity in the state.

Most of the speakers Thursday night in Lovettsville asked the Virginia commission to dismiss the PATH application "with prejudice," relating the idea that the opponents did not want the application re-filed.

"It is a line to nowhere," said John P. Flannery II, representing the River's Edge community, located just outside Lovettsville. Flannery, like other speakers, argued that both Maryland and West Virginia have not approved the plan and there is no approved Kemptown substation in southern Frederick County.

William Chambliss, general counsel for the Virginia commission, said that because of lack of approval in Maryland, it would be a waste of time, resources and money for the state's planning staff to review the proposed project, "only to have it end in the middle of the Potomac River."

Skirpan asked if it would be more costly to start review of the plans over again, should Allegheny refile for PATH. Chambliss said the commission could dismiss the application, but retain information collected to that point and use it again in the case of a refile.

One of the arguments by opponents is the ever-changing data coming in on energy demand for the region. Richard D. Gary, attorney for Allegheny Energy, said that while data comes out all the time, the project was needed for power reliability.

Gary also argued that the utility company definitely plans to place the terminus of the project at the Kemptown substation. That location was chosen, in part, because of where transmission lines for Allegheny Energy, Potomac Electric Power and Baltimore Gas and Electric could merge.

Some speakers questioned whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) could take over the project and overrule local and state authorities. Gary said FERC would not step in to take over unless it was asked by the utility company to do so.

Gary argued that the TRAIL project, a similar long-distance transmission in Pennsylvania, was approved in sections, not necessarily the entire project at once.

Skirpan said he would review all of the input and make a report to the commission members in Richmond within a few days. No date was set for a decision by the commission.

Post your comments »