Latest news with #Kalwa
Yahoo
10-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
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.'
Yahoo
10-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Anti-MPRP group considering legal response to PSEG court order filing for land access
Stop MPRP, a nonprofit group dedicated to stopping the creation of a regional transmission line across Maryland, is looking at potential legal responses to a planned court order filing requesting temporary access to properties along the project's route. The Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), an energy company based in New Jersey, announced Wednesday its intention to file a court order asking for access to properties on or near the route of the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP). The MPRP is a proposed 500,000-volt transmission line that could cut through northern Baltimore County, central Carroll County and southern Frederick County, ending at the Doubs substation. PSEG has a contract with PJM Interconnection, the company that coordinates the movement of electricity in 13 states and Washington, D.C., to build the MPRP to address anticipated power demand on the regional grid. PJM has predicted a significant increase in power demand partially due to new data centers to be sited in Maryland and Virginia, which could require up to 7,500 megawatts of power. Additionally, more than 11,000 megawatts of power generation have been recently deactivated, meaning less power is being created as the demand rises. PSEG said it needs access to the hundreds of properties along the route to conduct environmental studies and field surveys to move the MPRP forward. In order to obtain a certificate from Maryland authorizing the company to build the MPRP, the state is requiring PSEG to conduct these studies to verify the scope of the project's environmental and socioeconomic impacts. PSEG plans to file a court order on Tuesday asking for temporary access to about 90 properties to conduct these surveys. This could be the first of many filings if PSEG can't successfully negotiate voluntary rights-of-entry with other property owners. Jason Kalwa, the project's director, said in an interview that gaining temporary access to properties through a 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 company access. "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. "... 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." PJM has set a deadline of June 1, 2027, for PSEG to finish the MPRP and start operating it. 'We're going to stand together' Since the project was announced in June, thousands of residents have joined to form a fierce wave of opposition to the project. At public meetings, they've yelled at PSEG representatives and expressed frustration and fear of how the MPRP cutting through private properties could destroy businesses or drive people out of their homes. Stop MPRP, which has members from all three counties the MPRP would be in, was formed for the purpose of stopping the project and advocating on behalf of people who will be affected by the transmission line. Its website, includes resources like how to access the proposed route map and what actions people can take to oppose the project. It also sells items like shirts, bumper stickers and yard signs so people can show their opposition to the project. When cars drive on areas where the MPRP would go in Frederick County, several properties may have yard signs stuck at the edge of their properties. They say "No eminent domain for corporate gain" and "Stop Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project," next to a picture of a power line tower being crossed out. Stop MPRP also has a Facebook group, which had about 10,300 members as of Wednesday afternoon. After PSEG announced the MPRP's final path in October, it sent out about 800 letters in the fall to the owners of about 600 tracts of property who will be impacted by the route. Some of the land parcels have multiple owners. Joanne Frederick, president of Stop MPRP's Board of Directors, sent a statement after the final route announcement that said the organization's members are committed to stopping the project completely, regardless of the proposed route. Land agents on behalf of PSEG have been reaching out to affected property owners to discuss rights-of-entry to properties. 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. When Frederick learned about the news of the requested court order Wednesday morning, she said, she wasn't surprised. Although Stop MPRP doesn't know yet what specific legal response it may pursue — they need to see PSEG's court order filing first — she said the organization "won't sit idly by" and does plan to respond. She questioned a court's ability to compel people to give up land rights and said PSEG has acted aggressively, now "threatening to take land owners to court," she said. "These people are scared," Frederick said. "... We're going to stand together." Frederick County spokesperson Vivian Laxton said the county's stance on the MPRP is still the same in light of news of the court order filing, such as that PSEG should've had a more transparent public engagement process before moving forward with the project. In September, County Executive Jessica Fitzwater and the Frederick County Council signed a letter urging the state to reject any certificate application from PSEG for the MPRP. The letter criticized PSEG and PJM for not providing enough information or prior notice of the project to the public. It also said the MPRP "will directly and negatively impact current homes, businesses and farms ... historical preservation sites, and will diminish the property values of thousands of Frederick County residents.'
