Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the CPCN Waiver topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public Service Commission weighs whether amended CPCN law governs BGE waiver to reconductor 115 kV lines
Summary
At a July 15 Public Service Commission meeting, staff and the Office of People's Counsel urged the commission to apply newly amended section 7‑207 to Baltimore Gas & Electric's pending waiver request to reconductor two 115 kV circuits; BGE said the waiver could be granted under either regime. Commissioners took the matter under advisement to analyze retroactivity and cost‑allocation implications.
The Public Service Commission on July 15 heard attorneys and staff debate whether a newly amended Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity provision should apply to a pending Baltimore Gas & Electric Company (BGE) waiver request to reconductor two 115‑kilovolt circuits and replace one steel pole serving Howard and Anne Arundel counties.
"Staff recommends that the Commission apply the newly amended version of section 7‑207 to this waiver request," Roger Austin, a staff presenter, told commissioners, noting staff also prepared an analysis under the pre‑07/01/2026 statute. That post‑July 1 provision permits electric companies in some circumstances to complete construction related to existing transmission lines without prior commission approval, and still allows the commission to grant good‑cause waivers after considering enumerated factors.
The Office of People's Counsel argued the Utility Relief Act amendments — including the revised CPCN provision — govern pending requests. "The Relief Act is unambiguous that the amendments to the CPCN statute . . . apply to all pending waiver requests," Michael Sammartino told the commission, urging the commission to apply the new statutory factors when evaluating BGE's filing.
BGE's counsel, Joel Michel, said the company "agree[s] with those conclusions" in the staff and OPC analyses about permissibility, but disagreed with staff on which statutory version should control. Michel said BGE had assessed alternative transmission technologies and that the waiver outcome would be the same under either statutory framework.
Commissioners and staff probed technical alternatives and cost allocation. Commissioner Suchman asked whether dynamic line rating (DLR) or storage was considered as an alternative to reconductoring and whether data centers are driving the need for upgrades and should bear more cost. Staff told the commission that data‑center load for the Crystal Springs and Dorsey Run substations is relatively small in the long run (about 2.1% of load in 2026, briefly higher in 2028), and that overall load growth — roughly a 40% increase toward 2040 in the staff presentation — is the principal driver for capacity needs.
Exelon/PEPCO planner Eric Yeh said DLR "could get increases to the rating for these lines" but that for this project "the expected increase you would get is nowhere near the amount that you would need," so DLR was not seriously considered for the reconductoring.
Legal counsel for staff and for BGE exchanged extended arguments about Maryland and federal precedent, including references to John Deere Construction & Forestry and the U.S. Supreme Court's Landgraf decision, over whether the newly enacted statute can be applied prospectively to pending administrative matters. Staff said recent Maryland precedent and the Landgraf analysis support applying the new law to prospective relief in pending cases; BGE counsel urged caution absent clear legislative intent to make the provision retroactive.
Because of the statutory and policy implications — staff noted several other similar waiver requests are pending — commissioners said they would take the matter under advisement to consider both legal and practical ramifications before issuing an order.
The commission did not vote on the waiver at the July 15 administrative meeting; members said they would further deliberate and issue a determination in a future order.
