Allegheny Energy Inc. has asked state regulators to postpone a decision on its controversial high-voltage transmission line project through Washington and Greene counties so it can explore "new and creative alternatives."

Allegheny Energy told the state Public Utility Commission in a filing this week that it wants to pursue a more collaborative process that would allow interested parties to present new ideas "to address the (power) reliability issue," spokesman Doug Colafella said Thursday.

The company is asking the PUC to grant the request "expeditiously" to give it 90 days to gather information and produce an outcome, Colafella said.

The $1.2 billion Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line includes a 500,000-volt line that begins in Washington County and runs south into West Virginia, then east, ending in Loudoun County, Va., a total of 240 miles. In Pennsylvania, it would be built on a 36-mile path from southern Greene County to a substation in Eighty Four, Washington County, where it would feed into existing power lines.

Opposition has come from local residents and public officials, who question the need for the power line and the proposed route.

By requesting a delay, Allegheny Energy "has basically admitted they haven't complied with the regulations and statutes," said Willard Burns, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania, a citizens group opposing the project. To consider new alternatives to address power reliability issues, Burns said he believes Allegheny Energy needs to file a new application for the project.

On Aug. 21, two PUC administrative law judges recommended that the PUC reject Allegheny Energy's request for approval, saying the company did not prove the power line is needed.

In its 46-page filing, Allegheny Energy responded to the recommendation, saying the judges overstepped their authority in saying the application should be denied. The Greensburg-based power company said the line is needed to address "power reliability" issues in Washington County that could arise as early as summer.

Alternatives that could be explored include energy conservation efforts and enhancements to improve the efficiency of the transmission line, Colafella said. Those alternatives could be explored in talks with the parties involved in the case, he said. Allegheny Energy's filing said those alternatives must be ones that can be implemented in time to address any issue regarding the reliable delivery of power.

Allegheny Energy said it does not want the PUC to delay a decision on approving a planned 502 Junction substation near Dunkard in southern Greene County, which would receive a 500,000-volt transmission line from West Virginia. That new substation, which would be about 1 1/4 miles from the West Virginia border, is crucial to the construction of a piece of the transmission line that would run through West Virginia and northern Virginia.

That portion of the project addresses the Mid-Atlantic region power grid, including Pennsylvania, which is projected to suffer from overloads as early as 2011, Allegheny Energy said.

The state Office of Consumer Advocate and the PUC's Office of Trial Staff had publicly opposed the Trans-Allegheny line.

Irwin "Sonny" Popowsky, the state's consumer advocate, declined to comment yesterday, pending his filing of an official response in the case. Popowsky said he would state his case in documents that will be filed by a Sept. 22 deadline.

Whether or not the PUC grants the delay, the commission is not required to decide on approving the project within a certain timeframe, spokeswoman Jennifer Kocher said.

(c) 2008 Tribune-Review/Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.