Maryland PSC staff recommends pausing or dismissing the MARL line proceeding pending proposed changes.

Morgantown — Public Service Commission staff has requested that the commission either pause or dismiss NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic’s MidAtlantic Resiliency Link Project case. The request follows project modifications submitted by NextEra and new directives from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which staff say introduce significant uncertainty into the proceeding.

On July 30, NextEra filed five proposed route revisions with the PSC, characterizing them as minor. Staff disputes this characterization, noting that the changes affect three landowners not previously impacted and that the current timeline denies them adequate due process. Additionally, the revisions add nearly $1 million to the project’s overall cost.

The first revision responds to a directive from the state Division of Natural Resources, which asked NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic (referred to as NEET MA throughout the filings) to evaluate a route adjustment aimed at avoiding or minimizing further forest fragmentation within Hampshire County’s White Horse Mountain Wildlife Management Area. This change would increase costs by $334,611 (0.029%), covered by the project contingency. Second, an affected landowner requested that the route centerline be shifted away from a residential dwelling on their property, adding $198,668 (0.017%) to the budget, also covered by contingency. Third, another landowner asked for the centerline to be moved away from a residential dwelling under construction that currently falls within the right-of-way corridor. This revision introduces one new affected landowner requiring notice and reduces costs by $13,918 (0.0012%). Fourth, during engineering and construction reviews, NEET MA identified topographic and steep terrain associated with an existing transmission line crossing as a constructability concern. This adjustment adds two new affected landowners requiring notice and increases costs by $440,393 (0.037%), covered by contingency. Fifth, an affected landowner requested relocation of a proposed structure to better align with existing property features, reducing heavy angles for a straighter, more efficient design. This change increases costs by $35,565 (0.003%), covered by contingency.

“Staff disagrees with NEET MA's description of the revisions as minor,” staff stated. “These five route revisions result in a total project increase of $995,319, which is almost a million dollars.”

Staff emphasized that the proposal leaves newly affected landowners insufficient time to review the nearly 4,000-page application, intervene, and submit testimony. The last public comment hearing occurred on June 11, intervenor testimony is due by Sept. 8, and an evidentiary hearing is scheduled for Oct. 26.

“Staff, which includes financial and engineering professionals with expertise in utility regulation, has spent months reviewing and analyzing the Application and the thousands of pages of discovery that have been exchanged,” the filing noted. “Now, NEET MA expects laypeople who are impacted by the line to be able to determine the best way to advocate for their interest in less than 39 days.”

Staff argued that denying these landowners due process violates procedural standards. Furthermore, they contended that the route revision addressing topographic challenges should have been resolved before NEET MA initially filed with the PSC. “NEET MA’s failure to properly identify constructability issues gives Staff great concern regarding the completeness and accuracy of the Application,” staff said. “Failure to identify a constructability issue shows a lack of thorough attention to detail that is required for a project of this scope. This suggests more such issues could arise.”

Compounding these concerns, staff pointed to regulatory developments from June 18, when FERC issued orders addressing transmission line planning and large load data center customers across all six regional grid operators, including PJM. According to staff and an AI summary, FERC made preliminary findings that PJM’s Open Access Transmission Tariff—which sets terms, conditions and rates for public utilities to provide open access transmission service on a comparable basis to the transmission service they provide themselves—“appears to be unjust, unreasonable, or unduly discriminatory or preferential.”

Staff noted that PJM and transmission owners must now address nearly all aspects of the tariff in detail and show cause why significant changes should not be implemented. “The introduction of multiple variables to the pending [NEET MA] application has created gaps in critical data that must be considered before a decision is made,” staff explained.

Staff warned that proceeding with the application as filed poses a risk to West Virginia ratepayers, who may be unfairly burdened with covering MARL line costs. “PJM's tariff appears to be unjust and unreasonable because it lacks adequate mechanisms to mitigate the risk of cost shifting among transmission customers, which may result in unjust and unreasonable rates for transmission service,” staff stated. They highlighted that NextEra unexpectedly added rate impacts for Appalachian Power and Wheeling Power customers that were absent from the original application.

“The fact that oversights of that magnitude occurred under the current PJM tariff that existed throughout the entire development process of the application lends further support to the importance of pausing this pending application to ensure that the full magnitude of effects to West Virginia ratepayers are understood in light of the sweeping changes to PJM's tariff that are underway,” staff concluded.

Staff recommended that NextEra be required to provide the PSC with detailed information on how the FERC orders will impact the project, specifically asking whether “the data centers would still come to fruition if a major portion of the cost to construct MARL and related network upgrades is shifted from ratepayers within PJM at large to the individual data center customers that NEET MA currently intends to serve.”

Given the proposed changes, staff called for a minimum 60-day pause in the application process to allow newly affected landowners time to participate and give staff sufficient time to investigate and analyze the modifications. They also noted that FERC’s order on transmission service planning and data centers—which directly align with the two major components of NEET MA’s pending application—will likely necessitate reevaluation and revisions to the filing. “Should NEET MA decline to agree to request a tolling [pause] of this proceeding, staff recommends this Application be dismissed for lack of completeness,” staff said.

NextEra has not yet filed its response to the staff request.