Capon Valley Coalition

West Virginia Public Broadcasting reports good news, but notes the fight is far from over.

Opponents of a proposed power line through West Virginia have gained a new ally – the staff of the state Public Service Commission.

Allegheny Energy and its subsidiary, TrailCo, want the line to connect coal plants in West Virginia with the cities of the East Coast. The proposed line would run through Monongalia, Preston, Tucker, Grant, Hardy and Hampshire counties.

But first, the company needs approval from the West Virginia Public Service Commission. The PSC asked its staff and two independent consultants to study the project. They all came to the same conclusion: the data doesn’t justify building a new power line.

They’re telling the Public Service Commission to reject the proposed power line. That’s according to testimony posted last week on the PSC’s Web site.

Opponents are thrilled. But Allegheny Energy says the fight is far from over.

Lew, one of our supporters and correspondents, reviewed the document this story refers to and filed these notes:

My take on the documents:

The initial consultant, William Lewis, indicates that while additional transmission capacity may be needed, it is not needed by 2011. Given more time, other alternatives exist that may delay the need for several years. TrailCO did not give serious consideration to these alternatives. In any case, WV will not benefit from additional capacity nor be threatened by the lack thereof for the forseeable future.

Ellers, a PSC staff engineer, recommends the line application not be approved. Based on testimony of TrailCO’s witnesses, the TrAIL application does not appear to have been based on a comprehensive planning process, its demand forecasts appear suspect, its preferred route does not afford the least impact on WVirginians. And “it appears that TrailCo’s preferred route is not likely to provide the least impact to the environment and its citizens over other route alternatives. It appears that TrailCo’s desire to remain outside the State of Maryland has forced the citizens of West Virginia to bear the brunt of the impacts for no obvious siting reasons. (Emphasis added.)

Finally, as stated in Staff witnesses Lewis’ and Ileo’s testimony, the transmission line offers no substantive permanent gain for the citizens of West Virginia in terms of electric reliability or economic benefits.” Ileo takes on the financial implications and comes to this summary: “Viewed solely from an economic perspective, the information and data presented by Allegheny in this proceeding do not provide sufficient justification for the Commission to approve TrAIL. In large part, this finding stems from the failure of the Company to demonstrate the reasonableness of the load forecasts on which the claimed need for TrAIL is based, as well as the lack of a showing that TrAIL constitutes an economical (costeffective) deployment of resources.” (Emphasis added)

You can review the 187-page document Lew referred to yourself on the PSC Web site.