Public utilities; certificate of convenience and necessity for certain new transmission lines.
HB2386 revises Virginia’s rules for State Corporation Commission (SCC) approval of certain electrical transmission lines, especially lines of 138 kilovolts or more. The bill keeps the existing requirement that the SCC approve such lines before construction, but adds and clarifies factors the Commission must consider, including environmental effects, economic development, job creation, service reliability, historic and cultural resources, Tribal Nation-identified resources, and the use of existing rights-of-way. It also requires more detailed notice to affected property owners and local governments, including GIS maps, and makes those maps publicly available on the SCC website.
The bill also strengthens the evidentiary showing an applicant must make for a transmission line. The SCC would have to verify load-flow modeling, contingency analyses, reliability needs, conductor type, and the prudency of advanced conductor technology. Local governments could present evidence that planned transmission corridors in their comprehensive plans are adequate, and they could ask the SCC to consider the costs, benefits, and timing impacts of undergrounding a line. The bill preserves public hearing rights, requires local hearings when requested by affected localities or 20 interested parties, and expands route-change notice requirements if a materially different route is later considered.
HB2386 would amend § 56-46.1 of the Code of Virginia, which governs SCC review and approval of electrical utility facilities and transmission lines. It would add procedural requirements for notice, public access to route information, and coordination with environmental and historic-resource agencies, while also making SCC approval satisfy local zoning and comprehensive-plan requirements for approved transmission lines. The bill would further require the SCC to consider economic development, reliability, scenic and historic impacts, Tribal consultation information, and undergrounding costs when evaluating new high-voltage transmission projects. It also preserves exemptions for certain small renewable energy projects and lines that do not require a certificate of public convenience and necessity under existing law.
The available vote history suggests the bill faced skepticism in committee: a subcommittee recommended laying it on the table by a 6-4 vote. That indicates the measure did not have broad support at that stage, even though the text reflects a policy goal of improving transparency, coordination, and scrutiny in transmission-line siting. No committee transcript is available here, so the record shows procedural resistance more than detailed debate.
The main points of contention appear to be the bill’s added burdens on transmission-line approvals versus its benefits for local control and environmental review. Likely concerns include whether the SCC should be required to make more detailed technical findings, whether localities should have greater leverage over route selection and undergrounding, and whether the expanded notice and hearing requirements could slow needed infrastructure projects. Supporters would likely emphasize protection of scenic, historic, cultural, Tribal, and environmental resources, plus better public access and planning coordination, while opponents would likely focus on delay, cost, and potential interference with utility reliability and timely construction.