Letter to The Director Kevin M. Kolevar
October 10, 2006
Kevin M. Kolevar, Director
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
RE: National Electric Transmission Congestion Study Comments
Dear Mr. Kolevar:
I am writing in response to the Department of Energy's Request for Comments on Designation of National Corridors and on the National Electric Transmission Congestion Study released in August 2006. I appreciate the DOE's consideration of these comments and hope that in addition to considering public comments, the DOE will allow for a series of public hearings in areas that may be designated National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors ("National Corridors") before taking action to designate National Corridors in those areas.
In my correspondence to the DOE, dated May 2, 2006, I expressed my strong opposition and concerns to the Request for Early Designation of Constrained Area as a National Corridor submitted to your office by the New York Regional Interconnection, Inc. (NYRI) on March 6, 2006. NYRI had requested this early designation for a geographic area in New York State stretching from the Edic substation in Marcy, Oneida County to the Rock Tavern substation in Orange County. I appreciate the DOE's prompt response to my letter and your agency's denial of NYRI's request for an early designation from central New York State to New York City and the lower Hudson River Valley.
Since the DOE is currently considering designation of National Corridors to facilitate relief of electricity transmission congestion, I am again writing to express my unequivocal opposition to the corridor proposed by NYRI being included in any designated National Corridors by DOE. I understand that one of the two "Critical Congestion Areas" highlighted in the DOE's National Electric Transmission Congestion Study includes the region from metropolitan New York southward to northern Virginia. However, I am very concerned that the Congestion Study also includes in this large proposed National Corridor the geographic area from central New York State to the Hudson Valley that was previously requested and proposed by NYRI as a National Corridor.
I am writing to urge the DOE to omit the corridor from Oneida County to Orange County, NY from inclusion in any National Corridor to relieve transmission constraints in the Critical Congestion Area identified in the Atlantic Coastal region. Including this corridor in a larger National Corridor or in its own National Corridor raises a host of concerns and faces fierce opposition in the State of New York. I strongly oppose any action that would include the corridor proposed by NYRI in the DOE's designated National Corridors. I believe that including this proposed route in any National Corridor is not in the public interest, is not appropriate given existing federal designations in that corridor and is not needed to protect the long-term reliability of New York State's electricity system.
As you may know, the NYRI proposal and the possibility of a National Corridor designation facilitating this proposed transmission facility have raised broad and bipartisan opposition from the eight counties within this proposed corridor. A diverse coalition of local and county governments, individual businesses and business associations, farm bureaus, environmental organizations, state and federal representatives and the National Park Service demonstrates the tremendous and historic level of opposition to the specific NYRI proposal and also to any federal action that would preempt New York State's exclusive jurisdiction to review and permit such a project. Many elected leaders and local communities find particularly alarming and disconcerting the possibility of NYRI using a designation of a National Corridor to circumvent State reviews and permitting when this proposed corridor and project is located solely within the borders of New York State and is not an interstate matter.
NYRI has already submitted applications to New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) seeking approval to construct a 190-mile high voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission line from Marcy to New Windsor, New York. The PSC has ruled the NYRI application incomplete and asked for additional information on this proposal and will begin consideration of this application under state regulations when the application is deemed complete. However, it is clear that both of the alternative routes proposed for this transmission facility cross or run directly through the federally designated and protected Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River corridor.
The Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River corridor is one of New York State's most important natural resources. This corridor's federal designation under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act recognizes the River Valley's outstanding scenic, recreational, historic, environmental and cultural assets and specifically provides for this corridor's protection for present and future generations by the National Park Service. Furthermore, the River Management Plan for this corridor, which was approved by the Department of Interior and the National Park Service, explicitly prohibits the construction of electric transmission lines of this size, recognizing them as incompatible with the protection of this corridor. This prohibition recognizes that such projects are a threat to this tremendous natural resource and would be injurious to the long-term environmental and economic well being of the Upper Delaware River Valley.
As you know, DOE has solicited public comment on the issue of whether the designation of a National Corridor in a given area is appropriate and in the public interest. It seems clear that if a National Corridor designation includes the Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River, that designation is certainly not appropriate nor in the public interest. Including a unit of the National Park Service that is currently protected by federal law in a National Corridor would contradict and undermine the public interest recognized by the existing federal designation under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act states that it is the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Upper Delaware Valley was included in this program in 1978 and is protected from major electric transmission lines by the 1986 River Management Plan.
The DOE has also requested comment as to how and where the agency should establish the geographic boundaries for a National Corridor. Such boundaries should not include the Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River since the inclusion of this unit of the National Park Service in a DOE National Corridor would be in direct contrast to the charge of the National Park Service to protect this very area. As a member of the Interior Appropriations Committee, I would expect and request that the Department of Interior aggressively work to protect this unit of the National Park Service from such a threat. I would also request before any National Corridor designation is made by the DOE, that a full review is conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including public hearings throughout the impacted region, to determine the impacts on a federally designated component of the National Park Service and other significant local resources.
While it is undoubtedly in the public interest to ensure the reliability of New York State's electricity system, extending the National Corridor proposed for the Atlantic coastal area to the Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River is not needed to ensure such reliability. In fact, New York State's regional transmission planning organization, the Independent System Operator (NYISO), has not advocated or endorsed constructing new transmission capacity between central and lower New York State in order to protect the New York State's electricity supplies or reliability. In their report, "The Comprehensive Reliability Plan 2005: A Long-term Reliability Assessment of New York's Power System," released August 22, 2006, the NYISO did not recommend constructing such transmission facilities or in any way highlight the need for the NYRI transmission line proposal.
The NYISO indicated that there are other actions that can be taken to meet electricity needs in New York City, Long Island and the Lower Hudson Valley without constructing new transmission facilities from central to lower New York State. This Comprehensive Reliability Plan recommends the following: upgrading existing power lines to carry additional power; importing power from New England, New Jersey and Pennsylvania; implementing voluntary usage reductions; building additional generation capacity in New York City and Long Island; and reinstating New York State's power plant siting law for expediting the construction of new power plants, which expired a number of years ago.
Notably absent in this list of recommendations was mention of constructing new transmission facilities from central New York to the Hudson Valley or a request for a National Corridor between those two regions to facilitate such construction. If the construction of new transmission facilities in the corridor proposed by NYRI was necessary or beneficial, it is difficult to understand why it would not be mentioned in the NYISO report. In fact, the only entity that is advocating new transmission facilities between central and lower New York State is the foreign-owned, private, for-profit company that has proposed the new power line.
I would also add here that aggressive demand side management measures for electricity can offset much of the anticipated growth in demand in New York State and New York City over the next decades. Focusing on energy efficiency, energy demand programs and conservation makes sense economically and environmentally. Furthermore, reducing peak demand through efficiency and conservation will allow this country to reduce its dependence on foreign sources of energy.
There is also an alternative National Corridor proposal that would assist New York City in meeting its increasing electricity needs. The City of New York has submitted to the DOE a proposal for a National Corridor from New Jersey to New York City and Long Island. Such a designation would help to increase electricity reliability in New York City and would be much more appropriate and less controversial than the National Corridor designation in upstate New York. The City of New York submitted a specific request to DOE on March 6, 2006, requesting priority in the National Corridor designation process for a connection from the PJM regional area in New Jersey to the ISO region in New York State. This project between regions overseen respectively by NYISO and PJM allows an opportunity for improving interstate and interregional transmission.
As this corridor runs between two states (extending to additional states) and bridges the regions of two transmission operators (PJM and NYISO), I believe this particular National Corridor is much more appropriate for the federal government to consider. This proposed National Corridor is one that would help meet the metropolitan electricity demand without creating tremendous controversy or threatening federally protected lands. A designation extending between the regions covered by PJM and the NYISO would be much more consistent with the goals of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and would avoid the intense opposition that will occur should the DOE circumvent in any way New York State's right to review projects that fall completely within the borders of this state, such as the NYRI proposal.
I believe that the DOE can designate a National Corridor or Corridors within the Atlantic region without compromising federally protected lands or bolstering specific proposals that would be so controversial that they will be litigated in federal courts for many years to come. The DOE has indicated in the Congestion Study that DOE "wishes to work cooperatively with other parties to facilitate timely solutions to major transmission capacity constraints and congestion." However, if there were to be the designation of a National Corridor in the geographic area encompassing the Upper Delaware Valley, I am confident that we will find ourselves in a situation where a tremendous amount of time, resources and attention will be focused on fighting a poorly-designed project rather than addressing the State's transmission and generation needs. It is not in the national interest to foster inappropriate development of transmission facilities in a geographic area that contains federally protected areas. New York State certainly needs to address the reliability of its electric transmission system, but this goal needs to be pursued in an environmentally responsible manner that respects the rights of local communities and property owners and that does in fact serve the public interest. The NYRI proposal and the inclusion of NYRI's proposed transmission route in a National Corridor unfortunately does not meet that standard.
The historic level of opposition to the NYRI proposal has already resulted in the New York State Senate allocating $1 Million to fight this transmission facility proposal. If necessary, the State has indicated this funding will be used to oppose DOE intervention in the permitting of this proposal. The DOE's goal is to maintain and improve the nation's electricity transmission and generation capacity. That goal would be much better served by focusing on actions that will not pit New York State against the federal government or pit one agency of the federal government against another, which may very well happen if the Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River is included in a National Corridor, or if the DOE takes action to facilitate the NYRI proposal in New York.
In conclusion, I urge the DOE to exclude the Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River corridor from the boundaries of any National Corridor and also exclude from any Corridor the area from Oneida County to Orange County proposed by NYRI. In meeting the growing energy needs of New York and the greater Atlantic region, it is not appropriate or in the public interest to include the Upper Delaware Valley in a National Corridor and based upon the growing opposition in Congress and the New York State Legislature, such an action would be in fact counterproductive to establishing a cooperative effort to improve the region's electricity system. I also urge the DOE to hold a series of public hearings in New York State before taking any further action to designate a National Corridor between central and lower New York State in order to better understand the impacts to local communities of such a decision.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide any additional information regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Maurice D. Hinchey
http://www.house.gov/list/press/ny22_hinchey/morenews/101006DOENYRIcomments.html