Louisa County residents and supervisors press board over ValleyLink route changes, power-line concerns

Louisa County residents and supervisors urged the Board of Supervisors on June 1 to push for clearer, consistent information from ValleyLink and system operators after recent route changes that could bring new transmission lines through parts of the county.

Amy C, who identified herself as from the Louisa District, told the board she appreciated the county—s prior opposition to ValleyLink filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the county—s decision to retain legal counsel. She said she had attended ValleyLink presentations in other localities and found the information from ValleyLink representatives to be inconsistent across meetings. "If the need of this project is clear, then the explanation should also be clear," she said, and asked the board to "consider submitting a letter to PJM regarding the recent scope changes to this project."

Gerald Harlow, who identified himself as representing the Green Springs District, said the projects—routes had shifted onto his family—s land and urged the board to reaffirm the county—s opposition to data centers and related transmission buildouts. "They're the worst thing that can happen to a county," Harlow said, describing potential loss of farmland, changes to rural life and concerns about noise and pollution from temporary generators used during testing. He asked the board to allow longer speaking times when only a few citizens are present.

Board members responded that county staff and counsel are engaged. One supervisor noted the county had filed opposition to FERC and was exploring ways to obtain a seat at decision-making tables; another thanked Amy C and other citizens for their activism and for attending hearings in neighboring localities. The board—also discussed asking PJM (the regional transmission operator) to review recent scope changes after routes were revised and additional communities appeared affected.

County staff and supervisors also highlighted technical information compiled in the board packet from a March DEQ public hearing. A summary noted that DEQ had recorded that air cooling would be sufficient for roughly 96% of the year at the Lake Anna technology campus and that water cooling would be used when temperatures are above about 88 degrees, an item board members said warranted review by residents.

Why it matters: The exchanges show active local opposition and a county effort to use legal and regulatory avenues (FERC, PJM, DEQ) to seek more information and influence siting decisions that could alter land use, property values and local infrastructure.

The board did not take new policy action to block the project at the meeting; supervisors said they would continue to coordinate with counsel and citizens and to monitor filings and regional reviews.