Baltimore County lawmakers demand more transparency over power line project

Six state senators and 12 delegates representing the Baltimore District have written to Maryland’s electric grid operator to demand more transparency about the plan for a 70-mile electric transmission line that would span Baltimore, Carroll and Frederick counties.

The bipartisan group of lawmakers is also asking PJM Connectivity, which manages the electric grid for Maryland and several other states, why it can’t use existing lines and infrastructure for the $424 million project, instead building new lines that would run through farmland, wineries and homes.

“Our constituents deserve answers and transparency. Our constituents have significant concerns about the intended and unintended consequences of the proposed project,” the lawmakers wrote to Manu Asthana, president and CEO of PJM Interconnection.

The letter was signed by Democratic state Senators Benjamin Brooks, Shelly Hettleman, Kathy Klausmeier, Charles Sydnor, and Republican state Senators J. B. Jennings and Chris West. Signing state delegates include Democrats Eric Ebersole, Cathi Forbes, Michele Guyton, Cheryl Pasteur, Jennifer White Holland, N. Scott Phillips, Carl Jackson, Dana Stein and Aletheia McCaskill, and Republicans Nino Mangione, Ryan Nawrocki and Kathy Szeliga.

Plans for the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project have drawn opposition in heated meetings in Frederick, Carroll and Baltimore counties since they were first heard in July. Many lawmakers learned about the project on Facebook or from their constituents just a day or two before the company PJM chose to build it, New Jersey-based Public Service Enterprise Group Inc., held information sessions in all three counties.

PSEG representatives were unable to answer many of the public’s questions about the need for the project or why existing lines cannot be used.

PJM executives did not attend several public hearings held by lawmakers about the proposal, saying their job was to select a contractor and that the contractor was responsible for questions about the planned transmission lines. But the company said in response to questions that none of the proposals PJM received proposed using existing rights-of-way; all would require some construction.

“PJM has not indicated that our role in this process is complete. What we have said is that we play no role in routing and siting a project; PJM’s role in this process is to identify and plan for future system needs,” PJM spokesman Daniel Lockwood said in an email.

This dynamic has led to frustration at public meetings, where angry residents pressed for answers that PSEG officials didn’t have. One meeting in Frederick got so heated that organizers threatened to call the county sheriff.

“I want to say clearly that PJM’s refusal to engage with the citizens of Maryland is wrong and I find it an insult to all of us,” said state Del. Nino Mangione, who signed the letter and held a heated meeting in Hereford last month to discuss the project. “Their behavior and lack of transparency are completely unacceptable.”

PJM said Maryland needed the project because the state imports 40% of its power from other states and has retired or plans to retire 14 coal and natural gas plants. State law requires 50% of all power to come from renewable sources by 2030, but the state has added few new projects to the grid. Residents worry the lines will feed data centers in Northern Virginia.

Lockwood said data centers are the primary driver of increased demand in the short term, but added that “electrification is expected to become a more important factor in the long term. We need to plan for both.”

The 18 members of the legislature are the latest elected officials to voice concerns about the project. Republican officials from all three affected counties have opposed it. The Carroll County Board of Commissioners issued a statement saying it will “use its full influence with our neighboring jurisdictions and state and national leaders to stop the project in its current form.”

Mangione started an organization, Save Our Community, Lobbying against the project.

Baltimore County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. and Frederick County Executive Jessica Fitzwater also expressed concerns about farmland preservation and the potential for land seizure through eminent domain.

Local environmental groups and land trusts have also objected to the project, which would cover hundreds of farms whose owners have placed conservation rights on them to protect them from development. Twenty-four land trusts and conservation groups signed a letter saying the project is “inherently harmful” to the properties the land trusts are charged with protecting.

Once PSEG selects the final proposed route, it will submit an Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to the Maryland Public Service Commission. The Maryland PSC can approve, deny or modify any project. Lockwood said PJM typically submits testimony at this stage of the process and expects to do so in Maryland.