Fri. Oct 18th, 2024

The company tasked with building a controversial high-powered electric transmission line in northern Maryland released details of its preferred alignment Friday, one of the first formal steps in a fraught process that has mobilized vocal opposition from landowners, farmers, environmentalists and political leaders in three counties.

The proposed Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project would bring power from the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania through an existing Baltimore Gas & Electric transmission line right-of-way in northern Baltimore County, then through Carroll County and into an existing power station in southern Frederick County. Electricity from that substation is then expected to go under the Potomac River to Northern Virginia, where several large data centers need extra power for their operations.

PJM, which operates the electric grid in Maryland and a dozen other states, plus the District of Columbia, is seeking the higher-powered transmission line to compensate for an anticipated shortage of electric transmission into the region, due to the scheduled closures of coal-burning plants and the growing demand for power from data centers and other sources. The energy deficit in Maryland is projected to grow unless additional infrastructure like the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project is built, PJM has asserted.

But the proposed 70-mile project has generated a firestorm of criticism from an array of stakeholders and political leaders since communities first learned about the proposal in early summer, with several property owners warning that their land could be taken from them through eminent domain. The project has now become one of the most tense political controversies in the state.

PSEG, the New Jersey-based energy company that won the bid from PJM to build the transmission line, said they do not anticipate any homes being taken as a result of the project.

With Friday’s formal proposal, PSEG is beginning the process of seeking approval from the Maryland Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities in the state and has final say over the project. The company said it would formally submit paperwork to the commission late this year or in early 2025 and hopes to see the project completed by mid-2027.

In a briefing with reporters Thursday, PSEG executives said the proposed route was one of 10 alignments the company considered. They arrived at their preferred route after conducting extensive research, reaching out to multiple stakeholders and considering about 5,300 public comments.

“Every route is going to have impacts,” said Jason R. Kalwa, project director at PSEG. “We believe we’ve minimized the impacts to the extent possible.”

PSEG executives said they consulted with experts in high voltage transmission line siting, project management, environmental and cultural resources, engineering, permitting, real estate, construction, and agency and public outreach, before reaching a decision.

Company officials said they considered four broad criteria when choosing a proposed alignment: impacts on land use, environmental and social factors, plus engineering considerations. Dawn Shilkoski, the project engineering manager, said the route PSEG chose was especially good in three of the categories, with environmental impacts the one exception.

But “we do believe in the environmental [category] there are no show stoppers” that would make the project unpalatable to government regulators, she said.

Shilkoski said the company also prioritized avoiding population centers, including the city of Frederick, and other “built infrastructure.” She and her colleagues expressed optimism that the power lines would not be terribly disruptive of agricultural operations along the anticipated route, or harm historical sites in the area.

With the release of the proposed alignment, PSEG will begin contacting property owners within 150 feet of the project right-of-way, and informing them of three upcoming public information sessions in Baltimore, Carroll and Frederick counties. The first is Nov. 12 from 6-8:30 p.m. at the Embassy Suites by Hilton in Hunt Valley. The next is Nov. 13 from 6-8:30 p.m. at the Carroll County Agricultural Center in Westminster. The third is Nov. 14 from 6-8:30 p.m. at the New Market District Volunteer Fire Co., 76 W. Main St. in New Market.

After the public information sessions, PSEG will send another round of correspondence to impacted property owners, informing them of how they can sell their land if they’re so inclined. The company executives said Thursday they did not anticipate that any homes might have to be displaced to make way for the electricity project.

PSEG said it was sending out more than 800 letters to the owners of approximately 600 tracts of property along the proposed route — the disparity in numbers due to the fact that some parcels have multiple owners. The company said there are about 518 acres of cultivated cropland within the proposed right of way.

One of the things the Public Service Commission will consider when it evaluates PSEG’s proposal is how many land owners have agreed to sell their property to make way for the power lines. Property will not be taken through eminent domain unless the PSC deems it necessary for the project to be built.

PSEG officials insisted that they or their agents will not contact property owners for several weeks yet — though they said that doesn’t preclude residents from reaching out to them first.

Ensuring that land owners do not give away the rights to their property prematurely has become the focus of a group opposing the transmission line called Stop MPRP Inc., which has set up what it’s calling an “impacted landowners information hub” to help property owners navigate the process.

“If your property is on or near PSEG’s chosen path for the MPRP, you will receive a letter from PSEG asking to negotiate an easement on your land to construct the towers and wires,” the group says on its website.

“Receiving a letter does NOT mean PSEG is taking your land. It means they are requesting to negotiate an easement.
“The letter will include contact information for the real estate agent assigned to each letter recipient. Landowners can expect to hear from these realtors immediately after receiving their letter.
“You are NOT obligated to enter negotiations with the real estate agent listed in the letter. This agent is assigned to negotiate the easement’s value, but you are not required to agree or sell.  You do not have to allow PSEG or their agents onto your property.”

The opposition group also invited landowners to a webinar next week with a lawyer to learn “how to safeguard your property and understand your legal rights as we fight to protect our communities from the MPRP.”

Kalwa, the PSEG project manager, said the company would continue its aggressive public outreach throughout the process. Asked about the intensity of the opposition, he replied, “I would say it’s been expected, to be honest. That doesn’t make it easier, that it was expected.”

A spokesperson for PJM, Jeffrey Shields, said the grid operator isn’t especially surprised by the outcry, either.

“Most transmission projects proposed in Maryland have received significant opposition and no major high-voltage lines have been constructed in recent memory,” he said. “That is one of the reasons that the state is in such need of infrastructure.”

Shields said PJM would be providing extensive testimony to the Public Service Commission when the utility regulator holds public hearings on the transmission line proposal.

More on the proposed route can be found at www.mprp.com.

By