MARYLAND (WBFF) — While the proposed Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP) goes through the state regulatory process, an agency participating in the review of the proposed high-voltage transmission line called the current procedural schedule “untenable.” The proposed 67-mile transmission line would run through Baltimore, Carroll and Frederick counties.
According to a filing with the Power Plant Research Program (PPRP), which is part of the Department of Natural Resources, they said Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) was “overly ambitious” with the timeframe allotted for obtaining the required field-level survey information, given the difficulties in gaining access to necessary properties.
PPRP in a status update filed at the beginning of April, noted that the developers, PSEG, have not yet submitted all of the required data from the field surveys. They have indicated that “at least nine months are needed to review field surveys and coordinate with the other reviewing State agencies to assure impacts have been appropriately identified and may be sufficiently mitigated,” the filing said.
ALSO READ | Maryland Senate debates energy bill, makes changes from House version
“While PSEG diligently attempted to provide a portion of the field data prior to its March 2026 Update, issues associated with gaining rights-of-entry to many of the parcels led to fragmented field data,” the filing from PPRP continued to read. “Thus, except for a few isolated areas, PPRP and the reviewing State agencies have found it difficult to begin any meaningful review of the Project’s proposed right of way (ROW).”
According to court documents, PSEG was granted permission to have U.S. Marshals accompany surveyors onto certain properties to help them conduct surveys, after some landowners were accused of threatening surveyors and encouraging violence against them on social media.
PPRP has requested the Public Service Commission (PSC) revise the current procedural schedule, to allow for another status update on PSEG’s progress in October of 2026.
“As we understand it, Maryland ratepayers stand to pay the bill for this power line that will go across our state to serve Northern Virginia data centers,” said Betsy McFarland, a landowner impacted by the line. “And you know, despite what PSEG continues to claim, that the reality is that, and to continue to try to bulldoze through our own state process, just like they’re trying to bulldoze through our properties, is just inappropriate. And we’re really glad to see the PPRP is pushing back on that.”
This comes as PSEG filed a motion last month to set March 26, 2027 as a target date for a final order on the project. That date was previously included as part of a proposed procedural schedule last year, but was not adopted by the PSC last year.
ALSO READ | BGE gets approval for power line project through Harford, Baltimore, Anne Arundel
“A target final order date promotes sound regulatory policy because it gives transmission system planners, Maryland customers, landowners, and all stakeholders clear expectations for resolution of this backbone 500 kV reliability project,” officials with PSEG argued in a separate filing.
Officials with PSEG continued to argue that the proposed transmission line was needed to “solve serious and widespread reliability violations,” which if not addressed, could lead to “system collapse and blackouts” as soon as the summer of 2027.
“A target final order date provides clarity on when—if approved—the MPRP could be placed in service and help lower energy costs for Maryland customers,” PSEG continued to say in the filing.
PPRP responded asking the Commission deny PSEG’s motion to modify the schedule, arguing it “believes setting a target final order date at this time would be premature.”
“PSEG continues to push for an accelerated schedule and trying to bypass and bully our state process, just like they’re trying to bully landowners,” McFarland added. “And so, you know, we feel it’s really important that the state take the time to do this right and make sure it has all the information it needs to make a good decision.”
A spokesperson for PSEG did not wish to provide a formal comment in response to PPRP’s latest filing. Currently, the Commission has not yet issued a file decision on the matter.
Local Story
