With demand for electricity and other utility access growing, particularly as a result of data center expansion, the Trump Administration is looking for new ways to facilitate that build out along highway rights of way, landing on an approach not entirely dissimilar from Biden-era policy objectives.  

Last month, the U.S. Department of Transportation released a Request for Information on what they’ve named America’s Great Corridors of Commerce. The RFI and associated USDOT materials on the initiative describe a vision of “multi-industry P3s [that] promote broader use of the transportation ROW to generate commercial and public benefits.” 

The intent seemingly is to appeal to both State DOTs and other ROW asset owners, as well as utilities and private sector concessionaires. Much of the benefit would presumably be provided in the form of technical assistance—the USDOT materials highlight that they’ll offer corridor owners support from an interagency Federal task force “aimed at marshaling Federal resources and relevant permitting agencies and authorities to expedite and scale colocation in AGCC corridors.” 

On the other hand, the website appears as a link under “grants” on the USDOT website, and among the resources to be made available, USDOT includes “maximizing available financial resources” and notes that “in some cases, these underground utility tunnels or conduits may be eligible for financing by the Build America Bureau’s TIFIA or RRIF loans”. The Department also notes that the initiative will “enhance the value of highway and rail ROWs by creating financial incentives to allow for installation of these valuable utility corridors” [emphasis added]. 

DOT intends to designate up to five AGCCs per year. 

This new initiative is not so different in its policy goal from an early Biden Administration initiative to promote the use of highway Rights of Way by State DOTs. At that time, a memo released in 2021 (which has since been removed from the FHWA website but is still available thanks to the internet archive) had a similar policy goal and sought to modernize how states can more flexibly use their ROW assets. A key difference in the approach though was that the Biden Administration sought to clarify the legal authority for utility accommodation, without necessarily adding incentives for deployment. The Biden Administration also assumed a traditional state-led approach to deliver the alternative uses. In contrast, the new Trump era envisions a central role of a Corridor Manager serving as a go-between for the State DOT and utility. 

The use of a corridor Manager, according to the AGCC materials, will “assist State DOTs and railroads in effectively managing their ROW by eliminating administrative and operational burdens of utility coordination.” 

A comment to the RFI posted by a Texas developer notes that “the lease demand this model rests on has not been tested” and that “the concession economics depend on utilities and telecommunications companies paying rates that support a thirty to fifty year obligation.” 

Regardless of procurement method, there may be other challenges that the initiative will have to work through. Federal regulation (only since 1988) does permit States to allow utilities to install their infrastructure on Interstate highway ROW, and the current regulations for utility accommodation on ROWs (in 23 CFR, Part 546, Subpart B) states a national policy that “it is in the public interest for utility facilities to be accommodated on the right-of-way of a Federal-aid… when such use and occupancy … do not adversely affect highway or traffic safety, or otherwise impair the highway or its aesthetic quality, and do not conflict with the provisions of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.” The regulations separately make clear that “the lack of sufficient right-of-way width to accommodate utilities outside the desirable clear zone, in and of itself, is not a valid reason to preclude utilities from occupying the highway right-of-way”.  

Nonetheless, in other aspects the regulations remain somewhat prescriptive. Specifically, per regulation ““No new above ground utility installations are to be allowed within the established clear zone of the highway unless a determination has been made by the transportation department that placement underground is not technically feasible or is unreasonably costly and there are no feasible alternate locations.” (Clear zone widths vary but generally 30 to 32 feet width clear zone is recommended for a straight, flat 60 mile per hour roadway, and recommendations are wider for higher speeds and volumes, or curved roads.)

New utility installations are also not permitted by regulation in “scenic areas”, including those needed for highway lighting, weigh stations, or rest areas, nor within or adjacent to areas of scenic enhancement and natural beauty, such as public parks, wildlife refuges, overlooks, historic sites, and other locations.   

Federal approval is also required for each State’s utility accommodation policy, which FHWA approves contingent upon determining that the policies satisfy the provisions of federal law and regulations. 

With those conditions though, States set their own utility accommodation policies (UAPs) including policies for the installation of overhead or underground trans mission wires along freeways. According to analysis from the Pacific Northwest National Lab on UAPs, only a handful of states do allow longitudinal overhead wires along freeways. Specifically, the infrastructure is “generally allowed” in DC, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, New York, Nevada, Wisconsin, with Iowa and Illinois allowing underground longitudinal utility lines only. Otherwise state policy is either to disallow entirely or to “generally disallow” and permit only on a case by case basis. 

Nonetheless, State DOTs have demonstrated that colocation is feasible though and even a revenue generating possibility. According to proceedings from a National Academies conference, Wisconsin’s DOT started allowing longitudinal accommodations along highways in the 1990s for telecommunications and more recently for electric transmission lines. The state now has seven corridors that use interstate ROW. The state has established two separate revenue streams from the colocation: one fee of $10,000 per mile is levied for the occupation and accommodation itself, and one fee of $200 per tree provides compensation for trees removed during installation of the utility infrastructure. In the case of one electric transmission line, these fees totaled just over $600,000 for occupation and about $9 million for tree removal. 

The RFI also includes railroad ROW. Railroads collectively represent one of the largest private landowners in the United States, and the rail network spans nearly 140,000 miles across North America. Class I railroads also already have policies in place for where overhead utility lines may be placed, and generally require minimum distances away from the rail facilities, with distances ranging from 15 to 50 feet distance requirements. Railroads also tend to have narrower rights of way which can make colocation challenging for high voltage transmission lines. 

So while constraints are not insignificant in expanding the use of existing rights of way for transmission and other utility accommodations, it’s clear that the opportunity is also real. The approach of the Trump Administration to not merely clarify the allowable uses but to actively engage and select participants, provide resources, and help lead the work of collocating utilities may enable reluctant ROW owners to engage and help create a model for broader future coordination between transportation agencies and utilities.