PSEG to file court order seeking temporary access to properties along MPRP to review land
The Public Service Enterprise Group, an energy company developing a transmission line that would cross three counties in Maryland, plans to file a court order on April 15 — the first of several filings — asking for temporary access to properties along the project route.
PSEG needs to access properties in order to conduct field studies along the route of the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP), a 500,000-volt line that will extend for almost 70 miles across Frederick, Baltimore and Carroll counties.
In Frederick County, the MPRP would run through the southeastern and southern parts of the county near New Market and Ijamsville, continue toward Buckeystown and Adamstown, and end at the Doubs substation.
Maryland is requiring that PSEG conduct these studies, which will help illustrate the full environmental effects of the MPRP, to move the project forward.
Thousands of residents and many elected officials from around Maryland have mobilized against the project and have expressed fear, anger and frustration about the MPRP cutting through properties or possibly hurting the environment.
PSEG has a contract with PJM Interconnection, the company that coordinates electricity movement in 13 states and Washington, D.C., to build the MPRP to address anticipated increases in power demand.
Part of this increased demand is due to new data centers to be sited in Maryland and Virginia, which are estimated to require up to 7,500 megawatts of electricity.
Additionally, PJM has said that 11,000 megawatts of power generation across the grid have recently been deactivated while power demand continues growing.
PSEG sent out about 800 letters in the fall to the owners of about 600 tracts of property who will be impacted by the MPRP route. Some of the land parcels have multiple owners.
For months, land agents on behalf of PSEG have been reaching out to affected property owners to discuss the company temporarily accessing properties to conduct environmental surveys and field studies.
Some owners have been offered compensation of $1,000 for a temporary right-of-entry. Most people have either not responded or denied PSEG's requests.
Jason Kalwa, the project's director, said field data is used for most permits to confirm environmental conditions. He emphasized that gaining temporary access to properties through this court order would not be the same as PSEG using eminent domain.
Eminent domain is a governmental power to seize private property for public use with just compensation.
PSEG will not have access to the properties anymore after completing the field surveys.
A judge would decide how much time to grant.
'The property owners are not giving up any other rights. This is temporary access. This is effectively to allow our experts, environmental and otherwise, to walk on the property, take an assessment of what they see there,' Kalwa said in an interview.
'... It's not eminent domain. It gives us no permanent rights to the property. It merely gives us access to the property to conduct surveys, which are necessary for many types of permits out there.'
PSEG is asking for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the Maryland Public Service Commission as part of developing the MPRP.
This certificate authorizes the construction or modification of a new generating station or high-voltage transmission lines and is necessary for the MPRP to move forward.
'The MPRP will prevent extensive, severe, and widespread thermal overloads and voltage collapse conditions (reliability violations) from occurring on the bulk transmission system that serves Maryland electric customers and the surrounding region,' PSEG said in its application.
On March 26, the Power Plant Research Program, which is part of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, said PSEG's certificate application is incomplete — it doesn't have enough information on alternative project routes or specific environmental and socioeconomic impacts.
The Maryland Public Service Commission said on Jan. 10 that it would start making a procedural schedule to move the application forward once the Power Plant Research Program deemed the application as complete.
The program said PSEG didn't provide 'any discussion detailing why each of the alternative routes other than the proposed route ... were rejected and instead, focuses on why the proposed route was selected.'
The program also said the application doesn't adequately show the environmental and socioeconomic consequences of the MPRP's construction and operation.
Specifically, the application doesn't include field studies, which are necessary to verify that the MPRP's impacts are correctly documented and appropriate mitigation actions are taken.
The program said the application lacked these field-based surveys:
* Wetland delineations
* Forest stand delineations
* Geotechnical surveys
* Surveys on sensitive species project review areas
* Maryland Historical Trust-required field surveys
'Without field-based information, [the program] cannot fully evaluate the Project's impacts to Maryland's socioeconomic and natural resources,' the program said in a letter to the Public Service Commission dated March 26.
The Power Plant Research Program said it isn't opposed to scheduling a prehearing conference for PSEG's application to set a limited procedural schedule, but it still needs more information outlined in its letter to finish assessing PSEG's application.
Once it's determined that the application is complete, further procedural dates can be scheduled.
Need to seek judicial support
The same day the program gave its letter to the commission, PSEG filed a response asking for a prehearing conference to be held to create a procedural schedule so the MPRP can be built by June 1, 2027 — the date that PJM said the MPRP has to start operating.
To meet this deadline, PSEG has to start constructing the transmission line by January and therefore needs a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity by then.
PSEG also wants the conference to be held to rule on more than 170 petitions to intervene, most of which were filed by people with properties on or near the MPRP route.
A petition to intervene is a request to become a formal party in a case and be able to actively participate in the legal process and influence the outcome of a project.
PSEG also asked the Public Service Commission to determine its application is complete for the purpose of setting a procedural schedule.
The company said the information the Power Plant Research Program wants 'go to issues that [the program] would like to better understand and not as required information that is missing' under Maryland law.
Still, PSEG anticipated that the Power Plant Research Program would ask for field studies, which is why the company has been trying to access properties. Its response says that where 'necessary and appropriate, the Company may also need to seek judicial support to conduct the surveys.'
Bill Smith, a PSEG spokesperson, said the court filing PSEG plans to submit on April 15 will involve getting temporary access to about 90 properties.
There will be multiple filings requesting temporary access if PSEG can't negotiate with the remaining property owners for voluntary rights-of-entry.
The company is still willing to have discussions with landowners regarding compensation for rights-of-entry to avoid taking court action.
Kalwa said PSEG is aware that some property owners are extremely hostile to the company and won't welcome the idea of company representatives walking on their land.
'The safety and security of our team, the contractors that work for us, members of the public are of utmost importance. ... We just ask for folks' patience throughout all of this. We understand it's difficult,' he said.
'For the folks that don't want to talk to us, if they could, if they'd be willing to have a conversation with us, I think they'll find us to be reasonable, and hopefully, that'll calm some of their fears.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
E&E News
7 hours ago
- E&E News
Storms, AI demand and policy failures are upending US grid
Ensuring the nation's power grids can reliably deliver electricity is clashing with the tech industry's voracious appetite for energy — pushing the risks of power outages to new highs, executives of regional power markets told federal regulators Wednesday. Grid rules developed during periods of relatively slow growth aren't equipped for the demands of Silicon Valley's investment in artificial intelligence, extreme weather shocks, and deep national and state political divisions over energy and climate policy, grid operators told members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 'AI is going to change our world,' said Manu Asthana, CEO of the PJM Interconnection, grid operator for 67 million customers in all or parts of 13 Eastern states and the District of Columbia. Advertisement 'In our forecast between 2024 and 2030, currently we have a 32-gigawatt increase in demand, of which 30 is from data centers,' Asthana said. 'We need to stabilize market rules and find that intersection between reliability and affordability that works both for consumers and suppliers, and that intersection is getting harder and harder to find.' Lanny Nickell, CEO of the Southwest Power Pool, PJM's counterpart in a band of Great Plains states, said extreme weather threats and the increasing role of weather-dependent wind and solar power put outages at 125 times more likely to happen than eight years ago. 'As if this wasn't challenging enough,' he said, 'we are now projecting our peak demand to be as much as 75 percent higher 10 years from now, and that's largely driven by electrification and data center growth.' Jim Robb, CEO of the North American Electric Reliability Corp., the architect of transmission grid standards, said grid operators need 'much deeper insight' into future electricity supply and demand and the probabilities of extreme storms and heat waves that could push power demand to new peaks. Limited real-time information about the effect that dangerous storms have on gas pipeline deliveries to electric turbines is also an area of concern that has been left unresolved by the broader energy industry. Current industry risk analysis cannot do the job, Robb said in comments filed for a two-day conference at FERC's Washington headquarters. 'This will require stronger modeling of fuel and capacity performance to assess reliability risk,' Robb said. The industry needs to establish an agreed-upon profile of the likely risks operators face, like the 'design basis' accident scenarios that nuclear power plant operators are required to defend against. Susan Bruce, counsel to a group of industrial power customers, said her coalition shares 'serious concerns' about regional grid reliability and the ability to add enough new electric generation to keep pace with demand, particularly from 'unprecedented but undefined' growth of data center and cryptocurrency mining operations. 'There is a lack of trust that even very high prices' in grid markets 'can move the needle' to get new nonrenewable generation in service, she said in remarks filed with the commission. 'New rules of the road are necessary,' she said. 'States leaning on other states' Sharp divisions at national and state levels over climate policies is apparent inside PJM, said FERC Chair Mark Christie. Christie told PJM's Asthana, 'You've got 13 states plus the District, you've got widely divergent policies from New Jersey to West Virginia, from Indiana to Maryland. 'It puts you in an impossible position,' Christie continued. 'How can you guys balance these incredibly divergent political goals and try to run a market … that fits the economic textbooks?' One answer, broached by Christie and several state regulators at the conference, was to push more responsibility on states to meet grid reliability challenges. Panelists at the FERC conference debated whether electricity reliability and affordability would be helped if states ordered utilities to purchase part of the generation they expect to need in the future, rather than relying on PJM's competitive energy markets to deliver supply. 'How do we make it work without the states having a much larger role?' Christie asked. 'We acknowledge that the states need a role because we are responsible for resource adequacy,' said Jacob Finkel, deputy secretary for policy for Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D), who has led a challenge to PJM policies by Democratic governors in its region. 'We have a responsibility to our ratepayers for affordability.' 'It's easy to throw darts at PJM,' said Kelsey Bagot, a member of the Virginia State Corp. Commission. 'To the extent we want a larger role in the process, we have to demonstrate that as a group of states with very different regulatory structures and very different goals and policies, that we can actually function as a collaborative body and make decisions. 'I think that challenge has been handed to us,' Bagot said. Dennis Deters, a member of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, sided with Bagot, a fellow red-state regulator. 'We are reactive,' he said. 'Too many states are relying on [PJM] to provide resource adequacy. 'I do shudder to think of injecting more politics into an engineering effort,' he added. Michael Richard, a member of the Maryland Public Service Commission, said the divisions were over principle rather than politics. 'You know, Maryland policymakers, we believe the science on climate change.' Christie several times pressed panelists for opinions on whether states should be held accountable if their utilities aren't building enough generation to meet reliability needs, which, in his calculation, means generation that can operate around the clock, not renewables. 'If you don't build enough, maybe you need to pay a penalty. Clearly, there are states leaning on other states,' he said. 'The states have the ability to do a lot of direct contracting and direct support for their policies,' PJM's Asthana said. 'We have seen the state of New Jersey, for example, directly support offshore wind. We have supported them in that pursuit, and that can work.' Gordon van Welie, president of ISO New England, said that states can lose control. 'We know from experience that it's very hard building fossil resources in New England,' he said. A key part of the region's answer was investment in offshore wind. Now the Trump administration has thrown up barriers to that option, he added. 'So that puts us in a very difficult place as we enter 2030,' he said. 'Something's got to give in that equation. Otherwise we have trouble.'
Bloomberg
2 days ago
- Bloomberg
Data Centers Added $9.4 Billion in Costs on Biggest US Grid
By and Mark Chediak Save The rapid development of data centers connected to the largest US electric grid raised costs by $9.4 billion, a 180% increase, according to a report published by a market observer. The growing energy needs of data centers was the primary cause of tight supply-and-demand conditions, as well as high prices, in the PJM Interconnection capacity market, which serves customers from Illinois to Washington D.C, said the grid's independent market monitor.
Associated Press
27-05-2025
- Associated Press
PSEG Foundation & Corporate Social Responsibility Manager, Maria Spina, Recognized as a 2025 Innovate100 Honoree!
Congratulations to Maria Spina, manager of our PSEG Foundation & Corporate Social Responsibility, who has been recognized as a 2025 Innovate100 honoree! Through her leadership, Maria has helped build lasting partnerships and programs that uplift our communities and expand access to opportunity. We're grateful to have her on our team – and proud to see her impact recognized. Congratulations, Maria! View original content here
