Groups strategize on battling power line projects

Concern unites groups; NYRI marches forward

By FRITZ MAYER

WASHINGTON, DC — Congressman Maurice Hinchey, a politician who came out early and strongly against a plan to put new power lines through the Upper Delaware Valley, met with environmental groups on December 7. Hinchey, a Democrat, has long been critical of portions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, especially the section that gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) the power to use eminent domain to acquire land for power line use. He told those in attendance he would introduce legislation that would strip that power from that agency. He has also considered legislation that would eliminate the establishment of National Interest Electricity Transmission Corridors (NIETC), but that may prove to be politically more difficult to achieve because of strong support from the energy industry.

One of the topics of the meeting was the continuing fight against New York Regional Interconnect (NYRI), the company that wants to build new power lines through eight New York counties. Hinchey met with representatives from the Upper Delaware Preservation Committee (UDPC), which has been active in opposing the power line that would run through Sullivan County. Eve Ann Schwartz, representing Communities Against Regional Interconnect (CARI) and STOP NYRI from the Norwich, NY area, was also on hand as was William Douglass also representing CARI and the Upper Delaware Council.

The meeting also addressed issues that stretch beyond the Upper Delaware. David Hamilton, the National Energy Chairman of the Sierra Club, and Bryan Faehner of the National Parks Conservation Association, were also there because NIETC designation within the 2005 energy act could allow power lines to be erected in national parks. Since the passage of the act, the Department of Energy has received proposals for 12 NIETCs throughout the country.

According to his staff, Hinchey is not just looking at the power line picture, but also at the broad spectrum of energy policies, and is seeking to reverse some $28 billion in grants and subsidies that have been awarded to energy companies in the past few years. Also, he is co-sponsoring a bill with Republican Congressman Chris Shays of Connecticut called the “Energy for Our Future Act,” which would improve fuel-economy standards, increase tax credits for fuel-efficient cars and encourage the use of public transportation.

NYRI progress

Progress on the NYRI plan, meanwhile, is currently tied up with bureaucratic maneuvering. Back in July, the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) ruled that NRYI’s application in New York State was inadequate. The PUC told NRYI officials that they must provide a large amount of additional information.

In November, NYRI applied to administrative law judges within the PUC to have a state “mediator” appointed to the case.

The staff of the PUC and the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) wrote letters to the three judges who will decide the matter expressing opposition to the assignment of a mediator. The letter from the DEC said, “Invoking the mediation process now would place an undue burden on state agencies to essentially formulate an application on NYRI’s behalf.”

If the New York State and NYRI can’t ultimately reach an agreement on the project, under current law, FERC may step in and over-ride the state PUC process.

According to Pat Carullo of the UDPC, a FERC rule established in November allows the FERC process to begin one year after the company makes an application to the state. Therefore, even though the PUC has determined that NYRI’s application is incomplete, NYRI executives will be able to begin the “pre-filing process” with FERC on May 31, 2007.