Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pjm And State Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New MEA director warns PJM interconnection, offshore wind delays and federal funding shortfalls threaten near‑term rate relief
Summary
Maryland Energy Administration leaders told the Environment and Transportation Committee that federal funding holds and delays at PJM and in offshore wind will limit near‑term supply and may increase costs; MEA outlined grant programs and regulatory steps to blunt impacts.
Kelly Speaks Backman, the newly installed director of the Maryland Energy Administration, told the Environment and Transportation Committee that the state faces a convergence of factors likely to keep energy costs elevated in the near term: withheld federal funds, delays on offshore wind projects and a clogged PJM interconnection queue that has limited clean generation coming online.
"This is going to hinder Maryland from reaching some of our energy and environmental goals," Speaks Backman said, describing federal delays that left an estimated $137,000,000 withheld and another roughly $62,000,000 in solar funds that the state will not receive as originally anticipated. MEA officials said the Strategic Energy Investment Fund (commonly referenced in testimony as the CIF) — supported largely by RGGI auction proceeds and alternative compliance payments — remains the state's primary tool for low‑income bill assistance and clean energy grants.
Speaks Backman and MEA staff told lawmakers the PJM interconnection queue has delayed many projects; one MEA witness said the queue contains "tens of gigawatts" of proposed generation and noted that historically only 10–20% of queued projects are built. Regarding offshore wind, MEA estimated multi‑year delays and legal uncertainty, with one presenter saying developers and projects may be 5 to 10 years away from delivering significant supply to Maryland.
The agency emphasized multiple policy levers: active participation in utility rate cases to oppose recoveries MEA finds unwarranted; grant programs to support residential energy efficiency, rooftop and community solar; and regional coordination with other governors and FERC to press PJM for improved interconnection and capacity‑market practices. "We have a coalition of states that is starting to resonate with folks in Washington," MEA staff said of recent petitions and bipartisan approaches to reform PJM projections and market rules.
Committee members probed whether leaving PJM would be feasible. MEA staff cautioned that Maryland generates roughly 35–40% of the electricity used in‑state and imports the remainder; a unilateral exit would require complex replacement arrangements and could raise prices. The agency urged a three‑pronged approach — immediate distribution‑level projects and efficiency, medium‑term generation additions when PJM processes interconnections, and long‑term investments such as advanced technologies.
MEA offered to provide additional details on RGGI per‑megawatt‑hour charges and to follow up on program metrics. The committee did not take any formal votes during the session.
What happens next: MEA said it will continue to coordinate with state and regional partners on PJM petitions, pursue targeted grant spending from the SEIF/CIF to aid vulnerable customers, and return with any requested cost and program data.
