PJM's Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC) meets next week during a special meeting devoted to new proposals to solve PJM's 2024 Window 1.  This may be your last opportunity to see the proposals and ask PJM questions about them.  It may also be your last opportunity to make comment to PJM before they make their selection.

Do you want more transmission in Jefferson County?  Window 1 is IN ADDITION TO the already ordered Window 3 project that proposes to widen the existing easement through southern Jefferson and build larger metal towers there that contain both the existing line and a new 500kV transmission line.

Window 3 is for the purpose of exporting coal-fired electricity from West Virginia to Virginia's out-of-control data center alley.  It's not for us.  We are simply fly over country.

Turns out Window 3 wasn't enough.  Virginia's data centers have exploded because they are all racing to deploy AI, and AI uses 10 times as much power as a regular data center.  Now PJM is looking for ANOTHER extension cord to power Virginia's data centers.

Here's some of the contenders...

A "new" PATH project (yes, the same project we defeated in 2011).  It begins at AEP's John Amos coal-fired generation station in Putnam Co., West Virginia and crosses through 14 counties in West Virginia (Putnam, Kanawha, Roane, Calhoun, Braxton, Lewis, Upshur, Barbour, Tucker, Preston, Grant, Hardy, Hampshire and Jefferson) before ending at a new substation in Frederick County, MD.  From there, it will be sent on a direct path to data center alley in Loudoun County, VA.   That project looks like this in PJM's plan:

The 765kV "new PATH" would also cross through southern Jefferson County on a new 200 foot wide easement next to the existing transmission corridor, taking another 200 feet of people's property, and in some instances their actual homes.  The towers will be 175' tall metal lattice with 4 guy wires holding up each one.

Another idea PJM is entertaining is building two new 500kV transmission lines from  the west that would cross Jefferson County in two places on a new parallel easement 200 ft. wide next to existing 500kV transmission lines.  This proposal would widen both these corridors by another 200 ft. and would gobble up homes.  One of these lines crosses the very northern portion of Jefferson in a subdivision called Leisure Acres, and the other one parallels the existing transmission corridor through southern Jefferson that has seen so many of these awful proposals over the past several years.  On a map, that proposal looks like this:

Why is Jefferson County always the target for new transmission extension cords for data center alley?  Because there are existing lines here already.  PJM and the utilities are under the impression that if you already live near a transmission line you would be eager to have another taking even more of your property, and possibly the very roof over your head.  PJM refuses to listen to the fact that expanding existing transmission corridors is more damaging to the communities than new lines that can be carefully sited to avoid homes and other development (or better yet buried on existing road and rail corridors).  Another reason that Jefferson is always a target is the two linear national parks that sit on our borders.  The C&O Canal follows the Potomac on the Maryland side.  The Appalachian Trail roughly follows our border with Virginia.  Both of these national parks should be protected from multiple infrastructure crossings, therefore the transmission companies try to simply widen existing crossings instead of creating new ones.  These parks that must be crossed to get to data center alley are one reason the same people are targeted over and over again.

There are other options PJM can select that don't involve Jefferson County this time.  It's up to us to convince them to look elsewhere.

So, what can you do?  This is your last chance to tell PJM what you think before they make their selections!  If you can, please attend PJM's TEAC meeting on Tuesday, November 19, 2024 from 1:00 - 3:00 PM.  You can attend over the telephone, or (recommended) via Webex on your computer.  Webex is recommended because you can view the presentation slides as they are discussed, and enter the question queue to ask a question or make a comment.  The meeting is open to everyone, and everyone is welcome to make a comment or ask a question.  However, you must sign up in advance to attend the meeting. 

You can sign up here.  Signing up requires you to create a PJM account.  Many people have had difficulty getting the account created.  If you experience issues, contact PJM by emailing custsvc@pjm.com or calling (866) 400-8980.  These folks are very helpful and will get you fixed up in a jiffy.

What if you can't attend the meeting?  Please send an email to PJM and let them know what you think.  Download this document for the email addresses and suggested text.  If you don't tell PJM what you think, they're going to think Jefferson County doesn't care about becoming the electric transmission superhighway for Loudoun County's data centers.

This is our LAST CHANCE to try to influence PJM's selection.  You silence will be interpreted as acceptance.

Virginia is trying to shove the barn door closed after the horses escaped by holding a technical conference regarding its proliferation of data centers and who pays to provide their electric service.  Questions to be addressed include:

In other words, should Virginia create another rate class for electric service to "large users" (aka data centers) and assign them the cost of all the new transmission lines they make necessary?

Well, bravo, Virginia!  However, Virginia only has jurisdiction to assign the costs that are assigned to Virginia load serving utilities, like Dominion.  The cost allocation of these big lines is a federal responsibility under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).  FERC approves the assignment of costs made by regional grid operator PJM Interconnection.  PJM's current approved cost allocation methodology assigns the costs of lines 500kV and above to the entire PJM region.  The PJM region includes all or parts of 13 other states:  West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Kentucky, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Michigan and Tennessee.  When PJM orders a new line 500kV or above, it allocates the costs among all 13 states based on the percent of the entire system that state has used over the past year.  Every state in the region uses the PJM system, and every one of those states gets a portion of the cost.  Each state then assigns the costs to its electric consumers using state rate classes.  Virginia is thinking about taking its portion and charging it directly to the data centers that take service in Virginia.  

But what about all the costs for data center transmission lines that are assigned to other states?  The other states cannot charge them to Virginia's data centers, they can only charge them to the customers who take service in their own state.  We're all still stuck with the cost of transmission extension cords that serve Virginia's data centers.

How can this change?  It can only change at the federal level where PJM's transmission cost allocation formula is approved.  That's FERC's jurisdiction.  When consumers and consumer advocates asked FERC to make PJM change its cost allocation formula to make the state with the data centers needing new transmission responsible for their entire cost, they were rejected 2-1.  Only when the entire cost of the transmission gets allocated to the state where the data centers take service can it be properly allocated to the actual users of these new extension cords through the very process Virginia is currently proposing.  Virginia's proposal only passes Virginia's share of the transmission line costs to Virginia's data centers.  The data centers that need the new transmission are not taking service in those other states and therefore the other states have no choice but to allocate the costs of new transmission service for Virginia's data centers to their own consumers.

Perhaps Virginia should first be asking FERC to change PJM's cost allocation formula so that Virginia is responsible for the entire cost of their transmission needs.  Instead, Virginia is happy to be a parasite and let other state electric consumers pay the cost of serving their data centers.

When consumers and consumer advocates questioned PJM's cost allocations for its Window 3 projects last year, the majority of the Commissioners were of the opinion that since PJM's cost allocations are already set and the cost allocations for Window 3 followed that cost allocation scheme, the only thing the Commission could do was approve them.  However, Commissioner Christie had a different opinion (although he legally had to concur).  He thought that the Commission should take up the issue of who pays for state public policies that cause new transmission, such as building data centers, or closing fossil fuel power plants.

So while Virginia is acting parochially to solve problems for its own ratepayers, it is avoiding asking FERC to weigh in on this issue and solve the transmission extension cord rate burden on other states.  What's it going to take to solve this issue at FERC?  The other states need to speak up to ask FERC to solve it.

Meanwhile, Virginia will be taking comments after it holds its technical conference on December 16.  You don't need to live in Virginia to submit a comment asking them to raise the issue at FERC so that ALL its data center extension cord costs are allocated to Virginia, who can then re-allocate them to the data centers.  Nothing is ever going to change unless the other states speak up.

Click here for more information about Virginia's technical conference, Case No. PUR-2024-00144.