BGE asks Maryland PSC to waive CPCN for short 115 kV line reroutes at Riverside; commissioners raise prudency and scope concerns

Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. on May 21 asked the Maryland Public Service Commission to find that a project to reroute short segments of eight existing 115 kV overhead transmission lines within BGE’s Riverside property qualifies for a mandatory waiver of the requirement to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN). Staff recommended the commission grant the mandatory waiver; commissioners responded with detailed questions about whether the company’s request should instead be treated as discretionary or referred for fuller review.

Roger Austin, presenting for staff, said the transmission-line rerouting ‘‘qualifies for a mandatory waiver of the CPCN requirements’’ under the Public Utilities Article’s waiver provisions and that staff had reviewed BGE’s filing and the statutory tests. Austin said the estimated cost for the transmission-line rerouting is approximately $4,700,000 and that the related new 115 kV gas-insulated substation would cost about $85,000,000, with all costs allocated to BGE ratepayers.

Commissioners repeatedly asked whether the committee should treat the request as a narrow mandatory waiver limited to the overhead transmission reroutes or consider the entire, larger project — including demolition of an existing 34 kV yard and construction of a new 115 kV gas-insulated substation — because those broader elements affect prudency, timing and the total cost to ratepayers. Commissioner Richard pressed staff and company witnesses on the overall picture, saying the commission is receiving multiple expensive projects and needs to understand how this project fits into the broader regional plan. Richard warned that piecemeal filings can prevent the commission from reviewing a project as a whole.

Michael Dean, staff counsel, told the commission it could determine the filing does not fall under either the mandatory or discretionary waiver provisions and require a CPCN for the whole project if commissioners so wished. Several commissioners asked how long a discretionary review would take; staff estimated ‘‘several months’’ if a fuller evaluation were required.

Company counsel Crystal Barnett thanked staff for the analysis and said BGE is available to answer questions. John Strawbridge, BGE senior project manager, described the technical constraints: the utility plans to build the new 115 kV gas-insulated switchyard on the footprint of an existing 34 kV yard so the existing 115 kV yard cannot be taken entirely out of service during construction. That approach, the company said, requires rerouting eight transmission lines and the removal of multiple existing towers; a company representative said approximately 22 towers will be removed or replaced as part of the work.

Barnett and company witnesses confirmed the project was submitted to PJM and approved as a supplemental project and that permitting and environmental review would follow standard permitting processes. Barnett also said the company has retained a community outreach firm (Aceto) and that it had not received community opposition to date; she added the company will complete an environmental impact evaluation as part of permitting.

Several commissioners emphasized that prudency review of transmission-level projects occurs at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and that the state commission’s forum for a prudency challenge is limited. As Michael Dean explained, ‘‘any prudency questions should be raised with FERC’’ because the transmission-level components and substation sit in the federal regulatory forum, though the commission retains discretion to require a CPCN in particular circumstances.

Given the number of outstanding questions about scope, timing and cost containment, the commission did not decide the waiver at the meeting. Chair Hoover told participants the commission would ‘‘take this under advisement’’ and may ask additional questions of staff and the company before issuing a decision.

Why it matters: commissioners flagged concerns that approving a narrow waiver for the overhead-line reroutes could allow a larger, more expensive project to proceed with limited state-level scrutiny. The commission must balance the statutory waiver standard with its duty to protect ratepayers from imprudent costs. BGE’s filings and staff’s recommendation establish a starting record; commissioners signaled they may pursue additional information or a fuller review before deciding whether to grant the waiver.

What’s next: staff said it will continue monitoring the project, the company said permitting and environmental work remains, and the commission said it will take the record under advisement and may request further materials or a discretionary review before issuing a final ruling.