A delicate balance between State and Federal authority over transmission lines has existed for decades.  It is what has kept the peace between federal transmission planning and state permitting authority.  The Third Circuit Court of Appeals stands poised to destroy it in a case that has so far escaped the notice of the hundreds of millions of people who will be profoundly impacted by its outcome.

Transource Pennsylvania LLC v. Steven M. Defrank, et.al asks the court to determine that a state permitting a new transmission project has no authority to second guess the findings of PJM Interconnection regarding need for a new transmission project.  

Transource was selected to build a market efficiency project nearly 10 years ago that, according to PJM, would reduce transmission congestion and make electricity cheaper in Washington DC and Baltimore.  The project was to be built connecting transmission lines in Pennsylvania with transmission lines in Maryland.  It needed permission from the Maryland PSC and the Pennsylvania PUC.  Maryland approved the project after PJM agreed that the eastern portion of the project could be built on existing easements.  Pennsylvania denied the project altogether on the basis of PJM's congestion forecast and cost/benefit analysis being proven wrong during the permitting process in that state.

Transource didn't like that outcome and filed several appeals.  The appeal to the federal district court struck paydirt and that judge opined that Pennsylvania had no authority to second guess PJM's findings regarding need.  The only role for Pennsylvania was to determine where to put the project and it was prohibited from denying a permit.

Pennsylvania appealed and the case has just been heard by the Third Circuit this month.  The oral argument was a disaster for the State -- its attorney couldn't get a word in edgewise as the panel of judges asked questions that only they seemed to know the correct answers to.  The writing is on the wall.  Next stop... SCOTUS.

States have laws in place that determine how an application for a new transmission project must be adjudicated.  The state is required to make several findings under state law.  While the findings may be different from state to state, most of them include a directive to determine if the project is needed.  This is why the permit issued is called a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (or other variations on this theme).  The state evaluates the case for need presented by the utility.  The utility presents its witnesses who say the project is needed, including witnesses from regional transmission organizations like PJM.  The state evaluates the evidence and makes its findings.  Never before in history has a state been required to accept the need findings of the regional grid operator without question.  In most cases, however, the state finds the regional transmission authority witnesses to be credible and adopts their determination of need in its determination.  However, in rare cases, the state has not found the regional transmission to be credible and has denied the permit.  It happened in New Jersey a few years ago in the Monmouth County Reliability Project case.  The utility in that case accepted the result and the project was not built.  Apparently we didn't need it anyhow.

And that's just the case with the Transource project.  The Pennsylvania PUC was right... the project was not needed.  PJM has recently revealed that the cost benefit ratio for the project has fallen below break even and that, if built, the project would cause uncontrolled congestion on the transmission system.  But when the lawyer for the State tried to bring that up during oral argument, the judges cut him right off.  They didn't want to hear it.

The Court's position would saddle electric ratepayers with huge costs for transmission projects that don't deliver more benefits than their cost to build.  Perhaps the Court would see it differently if they attended a couple of PJM meetings where these projects are evaluated and added to the plan.  PJM meetings are one-sided information sessions.  Although meeting participants can ask questions, PJM dismisses any arguments against its findings.  PJM is a utility member organization.  It always sides with the utilities.  There is no independent evaluator who looks at all the evidence before deciding the project is needed.  Compare to a state's evaluation of need, where all parties can present evidence to be decided by an impartial judge or panel of commissioners.  There is no give and take, or independent thought, at PJM... it is an authoritative dictatorship.

If states are prohibited from determining if a transmission project is needed under state law, what happens with merchant transmission projects or those planned by utilities outside a regional planning process?  Must the state also take the utility's determination of need without question?

The Court is prepared to open a can of worms that will ensure transmission is delayed or denied for other reasons.  Nobody likes being told that they have to accept the word of a dictator without question, states included.  The Court has suggested that a state who doesn't think a transmission line found needed in the regional planning process is actually needed should file a complaint against the grid operator at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  If that is the only avenue open to states, prepare for a deluge of complaints at FERC.  Since FERC moves at a snail's pace (on a good day) this is going to tie up regional transmission planning for years and ensure that nothing gets built until need for it has completely evaporated, as it did in the case of the Transource project.  A state that may have agreed with PJM that a project is needed is now required to file a complaint at FERC to get a determination on whether it is actually needed.  Instead of states, grid operators, and federal regulators cooperating to keep the transmission system reliable, we're going to have nothing but litigation and delays while the lights go out.

PJM's Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC) meets next week during a special meeting devoted to new proposals to solve PJM's 2024 Window 1.  This may be your last opportunity to see the proposals and ask PJM questions about them.  It may also be your last opportunity to make comment to PJM before they make their selection.

Do you want more transmission in Jefferson County?  Window 1 is IN ADDITION TO the already ordered Window 3 project that proposes to widen the existing easement through southern Jefferson and build larger metal towers there that contain both the existing line and a new 500kV transmission line.

Window 3 is for the purpose of exporting coal-fired electricity from West Virginia to Virginia's out-of-control data center alley.  It's not for us.  We are simply fly over country.

Turns out Window 3 wasn't enough.  Virginia's data centers have exploded because they are all racing to deploy AI, and AI uses 10 times as much power as a regular data center.  Now PJM is looking for ANOTHER extension cord to power Virginia's data centers.

Here's some of the contenders...

A "new" PATH project (yes, the same project we defeated in 2011).  It begins at AEP's John Amos coal-fired generation station in Putnam Co., West Virginia and crosses through 14 counties in West Virginia (Putnam, Kanawha, Roane, Calhoun, Braxton, Lewis, Upshur, Barbour, Tucker, Preston, Grant, Hardy, Hampshire and Jefferson) before ending at a new substation in Frederick County, MD.  From there, it will be sent on a direct path to data center alley in Loudoun County, VA.   That project looks like this in PJM's plan:

The 765kV "new PATH" would also cross through southern Jefferson County on a new 200 foot wide easement next to the existing transmission corridor, taking another 200 feet of people's property, and in some instances their actual homes.  The towers will be 175' tall metal lattice with 4 guy wires holding up each one.

Another idea PJM is entertaining is building two new 500kV transmission lines from  the west that would cross Jefferson County in two places on a new parallel easement 200 ft. wide next to existing 500kV transmission lines.  This proposal would widen both these corridors by another 200 ft. and would gobble up homes.  One of these lines crosses the very northern portion of Jefferson in a subdivision called Leisure Acres, and the other one parallels the existing transmission corridor through southern Jefferson that has seen so many of these awful proposals over the past several years.  On a map, that proposal looks like this:

Why is Jefferson County always the target for new transmission extension cords for data center alley?  Because there are existing lines here already.  PJM and the utilities are under the impression that if you already live near a transmission line you would be eager to have another taking even more of your property, and possibly the very roof over your head.  PJM refuses to listen to the fact that expanding existing transmission corridors is more damaging to the communities than new lines that can be carefully sited to avoid homes and other development (or better yet buried on existing road and rail corridors).  Another reason that Jefferson is always a target is the two linear national parks that sit on our borders.  The C&O Canal follows the Potomac on the Maryland side.  The Appalachian Trail roughly follows our border with Virginia.  Both of these national parks should be protected from multiple infrastructure crossings, therefore the transmission companies try to simply widen existing crossings instead of creating new ones.  These parks that must be crossed to get to data center alley are one reason the same people are targeted over and over again.

There are other options PJM can select that don't involve Jefferson County this time.  It's up to us to convince them to look elsewhere.

So, what can you do?  This is your last chance to tell PJM what you think before they make their selections!  If you can, please attend PJM's TEAC meeting on Tuesday, November 19, 2024 from 1:00 - 3:00 PM.  You can attend over the telephone, or (recommended) via Webex on your computer.  Webex is recommended because you can view the presentation slides as they are discussed, and enter the question queue to ask a question or make a comment.  The meeting is open to everyone, and everyone is welcome to make a comment or ask a question.  However, you must sign up in advance to attend the meeting. 

You can sign up here.  Signing up requires you to create a PJM account.  Many people have had difficulty getting the account created.  If you experience issues, contact PJM by emailing custsvc@pjm.com or calling (866) 400-8980.  These folks are very helpful and will get you fixed up in a jiffy.

What if you can't attend the meeting?  Please send an email to PJM and let them know what you think.  Download this document for the email addresses and suggested text.  If you don't tell PJM what you think, they're going to think Jefferson County doesn't care about becoming the electric transmission superhighway for Loudoun County's data centers.

This is our LAST CHANCE to try to influence PJM's selection.  You silence will be interpreted as acceptance.

Virginia is trying to shove the barn door closed after the horses escaped by holding a technical conference regarding its proliferation of data centers and who pays to provide their electric service.  Questions to be addressed include:

In other words, should Virginia create another rate class for electric service to "large users" (aka data centers) and assign them the cost of all the new transmission lines they make necessary?

Well, bravo, Virginia!  However, Virginia only has jurisdiction to assign the costs that are assigned to Virginia load serving utilities, like Dominion.  The cost allocation of these big lines is a federal responsibility under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).  FERC approves the assignment of costs made by regional grid operator PJM Interconnection.  PJM's current approved cost allocation methodology assigns the costs of lines 500kV and above to the entire PJM region.  The PJM region includes all or parts of 13 other states:  West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Kentucky, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, the District of Columbia, Indiana, Michigan and Tennessee.  When PJM orders a new line 500kV or above, it allocates the costs among all 13 states based on the percent of the entire system that state has used over the past year.  Every state in the region uses the PJM system, and every one of those states gets a portion of the cost.  Each state then assigns the costs to its electric consumers using state rate classes.  Virginia is thinking about taking its portion and charging it directly to the data centers that take service in Virginia.  

But what about all the costs for data center transmission lines that are assigned to other states?  The other states cannot charge them to Virginia's data centers, they can only charge them to the customers who take service in their own state.  We're all still stuck with the cost of transmission extension cords that serve Virginia's data centers.

How can this change?  It can only change at the federal level where PJM's transmission cost allocation formula is approved.  That's FERC's jurisdiction.  When consumers and consumer advocates asked FERC to make PJM change its cost allocation formula to make the state with the data centers needing new transmission responsible for their entire cost, they were rejected 2-1.  Only when the entire cost of the transmission gets allocated to the state where the data centers take service can it be properly allocated to the actual users of these new extension cords through the very process Virginia is currently proposing.  Virginia's proposal only passes Virginia's share of the transmission line costs to Virginia's data centers.  The data centers that need the new transmission are not taking service in those other states and therefore the other states have no choice but to allocate the costs of new transmission service for Virginia's data centers to their own consumers.

Perhaps Virginia should first be asking FERC to change PJM's cost allocation formula so that Virginia is responsible for the entire cost of their transmission needs.  Instead, Virginia is happy to be a parasite and let other state electric consumers pay the cost of serving their data centers.

When consumers and consumer advocates questioned PJM's cost allocations for its Window 3 projects last year, the majority of the Commissioners were of the opinion that since PJM's cost allocations are already set and the cost allocations for Window 3 followed that cost allocation scheme, the only thing the Commission could do was approve them.  However, Commissioner Christie had a different opinion (although he legally had to concur).  He thought that the Commission should take up the issue of who pays for state public policies that cause new transmission, such as building data centers, or closing fossil fuel power plants.

So while Virginia is acting parochially to solve problems for its own ratepayers, it is avoiding asking FERC to weigh in on this issue and solve the transmission extension cord rate burden on other states.  What's it going to take to solve this issue at FERC?  The other states need to speak up to ask FERC to solve it.

Meanwhile, Virginia will be taking comments after it holds its technical conference on December 16.  You don't need to live in Virginia to submit a comment asking them to raise the issue at FERC so that ALL its data center extension cord costs are allocated to Virginia, who can then re-allocate them to the data centers.  Nothing is ever going to change unless the other states speak up.

Click here for more information about Virginia's technical conference, Case No. PUR-2024-00144.

PJM's recent capacity auction resulted in huge price spikes in the cost of supplying power to electric customers in the PJM region for the 2025-2026 year.  It was directly caused by the actions of PJM and FERC.  These entities aren't protecting ratepayers, they are harming them!  Let me explain...

PJM holds annual capacity auctions to secure the provision of electricity three years in advance.  A capacity auction is not actual electricity, it is a promise from a generator to supply a certain amount of energy at a future point in time.  This is how PJM ensures that it will have enough electricity supply available three years from the auction.  PJM is paying these generators to be available to produce energy when needed during the auction year.  PJM starts by announcing a certain amount of electricity is needed for the auction year.  Generators submit bids of how much it will cost to be standing by to produce that electricity during the auction year.  PJM stacks the bids by price, and each bid is represented by an amount of electricity and a price.  PJM then looks at its bid stack and finds the place where the capacity need is met.  Whatever the price of that bid is the clearing price for all the capacity bids lower in the stack.  Those bids that go over the capacity price are not accepted.  At the end of the auction, PJM has a stable of committed generators sure to provide the power when needed 3 years from the auction date.

PJM does not order generation.  Generation is a market construct, where generators build when the capacity prices are profitable.  If the clearing price at auction is high, it would entice the development of new generation.  If the clearing price is low, many generators may not have enough revenue to continue to operate at a profit.  This is how PJM manages generation to make sure there is always enough, but not too much.  The auction serves as an important warning bell... when clearing prices are high, it means more generation needs to be built.  The auction sends a signal to generators to build more when the prices are high.  More generators lowers prices because there is more competition in the supply.  But what happens when the prices are high at the auction and no new generators get built?  That's exactly what just happened... there is a dearth of needed generation in PJM so prices shot through the roof to record highs.

The problem here began with PJM making a proposal to change the parameters of its auction.  In order to do so, it needed FERC's permission.  A battle broke out at FERC, with many other parties objecting to the auction changes.  FERC moves at a snail's pace and can take years to make a decision on a request.  The more parties to a case, the longer it takes to resolve it.

Because of the battle going on at FERC, the auctions got put on hold.  As Power magazine says, 

FERC suspended PJM's capacity auctions while it resolved the issue.  That's like turning off the warning system.  PJM's annual capacity auction couldn't send the market signal to build new generation because it wasn't being held.

During this time, an extreme change in the power needs of the PJM region was underway.  Many baseload fossil fuel generators closed, either the result of the last auction's low capacity prices, or because they were "dirty" and no longer socially acceptable.  The new generation that entered the market could not keep up with the amount of generation that was closing.  As a result, we had less generation available.  Also during this time, the building of new data centers and increasing power demands for AI shot through the roof.  No new generation to supply power for these data centers was proposed or built because PJM's auction warning bell was not sounding due to the auctions being suspended.

PJM used the only tool it had available to meet regional need... transmission.  PJM conducted a competitive transmission window to connect the remaining generators with the new data center load.  Unfortunately, the majority of the available generators are located in WV and PA, and the data center load is in Northern Virginia.  PJM asked for new transmission to connect the two, and it ended up with a whole bunch of new projects, including MARL and MPRP.  PJM says they are "needed" to supply power to the data centers because no new generation has been built anywhere near the data centers.

Now that FERC has finally resolved the issue and PJM has its new market parameters, PJM recently began holding auctions again.  The first new auction for the 2025-2026 year was held just 10 months before the auction year begins, instead of 3 years in advance.  There's no way new generators can be built in 10 months, even if the prices are generous enough to support them economically.  That's why the auction is always held 3 years in advance, in order to give time for new generation to be built to reduce auction prices.

Instead, we're looking at a transmission bandaid to keep the existing generation flowing to the places that need it.  And PJM has opened another transmission planning window to add another 4,500MW of generation imports to Northern Virginia because there is no generation currently proposed to fill that need.

Eventually, if PJM's market signal works as intended, new generation will be built near the load.  However, certain states like Virginia and Maryland have passed laws that prevent the building of new fossil fuel generation.  That leaves only the nuclear option to supply the outrageous amount of power needed by the data centers.  Can you imagine how long it would take to build a new nuclear plant in Northern Virginia?  It would be completed on the 12th of Never.  Meanwhile, transmission is the only viable option.

PJM's market system didn't work to get generation built in time to meet new need because PJM and FERC had turned it off and were asleep at the switch.  Now we have a disaster of epic proportions on our hands.

What's going to happen first?  The construction of hotly opposed transmission projects, or the building of new generation?  And where will that generation be built?  Continuing to build in PA and WV only perpetuates the transmission problem.  We need new generation at load.  It's probably cheaper than billions of dollars of new transmission, but it takes a willingness to sacrifice for its own benefit on the part of the data center loving states.

New generation is coming to market... and how much of it will obviate the need for new transmission?  That's an unknown at this point, but it's going to happen.  PJM's transmission project needs will change and fall apart.  Let's hold the line, folks!  This battle is far from over!

Here we go again!  

As if all the new transmission that came out of PJM's 2022 Window 3 isn't enough already, guess what?  PJM miscalculated.

That's right... the data center load in Northern Virginia is much bigger than PJM thought when it planned and selected a bunch of new transmission projects last year.

Here's PJM's latest plan.

PJM shared at its TEAC meeting last week that it was going to open a new window for transmission to import an additional 4,500MW of generation to "data center alley."  This time, the generation is supposed to come from wind, solar, and storage in Illinois.  Illinois, people!  Numerous new transmission lines from the Midwest to Loudoun County, Virginia.  That's 700 miles of new transmission!

How is it supposed to get there?  PJM burned up all its existing transmission corridors last time by using up the Doubs-Goose Creek corridor to save the Sacred Cows.  There won't be any new transmission going through Doubs this time around.  There also won't be any new transmission coming from the east.  Seems Pennsylvania is tapped out for exports this time around.

PJM claims:

That's going to look like this:

PJM is targeting new project approvals for this window at the end of this year so that transmission owners can get started failing at building them next year.

Sometimes, I get up in the morning and wonder if PJM is just punking us all by pretending that all this new transmission can actually get built.  When project after project fails, the data centers causing this problem are going to leave for more powerful pastures elsewhere, and then PJM can shrug and say, "Well, we tried!"

It's time to start participating in TEAC meetings again.  I'm sure they've missed all of us these past couple months...  see ya there!

At its July 9 Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee meeting, PJM proposed a re-route of the MidAtlantic Resiliency Link (MARL).  MARL is a giant extension cord for importing West Virginia coal-fired electricity to Loudoun County's "data center alley." 

Loudoun County just can't stop approving new data centers, even though it has no way to power them.  Now Loudoun's data center addiction is impacting people in other states... people who will have their property taken using eminent domain so that Loudoun can have more electricity for its data centers.  Loudoun County is not going to stop building data centers until its voters MAKE them stop building data centers.  That would happen in a hot minute if Loudoun County's SACRED COWS were impacted by the data centers.

This is the Sacred Cow Zone.  A look at an electric infrastructure map shows a pristine donut hole surrounded by high voltage transmission lines, substations, and generators on all sides.  But there's nothing in the Sacred Cow Zone!

What's a Sacred Cow?  A person with more money (and therefore more political influence) than you.  Examples include Jackie Kennedy, who took umbrage at a proposal to run a power line through her pony club in the Sacred Cow Zone back in the 1960's.  Legend has it that caused the line to end up in Jefferson County, West Virginia instead.  It's the reason we have that 500kV transmission line right across the middle of our county today.  Another example might be the movie stars and their wine-making friends who objected to a different 500kV high-voltage transmission line in the mid 2000s called TrAIL.  That line got pushed south into Fauquier County instead of impacting the Sacred Cows.

If you want to nauseate yourself a bit you could read the fakeass "report" the Sacred Cows threw together to plead their case that they are much, much too sacred to be impacted by the MARL.  They really think they are much more special than you.  Their views!  Their wine!  Their horses! Their environment!  They even claim to be DC's "central park", where harried rich and important people can go to escape the daily grind of grinding the less fortunate into the dirt.  If they thought they were going to get some sympathy from that report, I suggest it's time to buy a mirror and take a really good look.  Your arrogance is showing and people are laughing at your utter snobbery.  Get over yourself!

Because of Jackie Kennedy's pony club and resident movie stars, PJM was also attuned to the history of the Sacred Cow Zone.  It created a "work around" re-route up front, and now it has pulled the ejector button before even TRYING to propose a route through Loudoun.  It went from this

to this

It's a miracle!  The Sacred Cow Zone has been saved again!  However, in doing so, other landowners who were not previously affected are now affected.  In fact, those landowners in Northern Loudoun will have their property taken using eminent domain to widen the existing right of way, as confirmed by FirstEnergy's representative at the meeting.  Those sacrificial lambs get no consideration because they are not rich or important.

You may find it surprising that the Sacred Cow Zone is more important than the C&O Canal National Historical Park!  The re-route crosses the C&O twice whereas the original route didn't cross it at all.  Let's trash a national historical park that regular people from all over the region visit to escape snobbery and selfishness... in favor of snobbery and selfishness.  Is the Sacred Cow Zone really more important than a national park?

What is not really surprising is that the Sacred Cows didn't even think about using their Sacred status to actually help others.  Maybe if they did, they wouldn't be sacred anymore?  In exchange for continuing their Sacred status, the Cows proclaimed their mission:  

To support the overall PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP) to inter alia supply the rising power needs of the region’s data center industry

Keep that in mind... the Sacred Cows love PJM, transmission lines, and data centers... as long as they are Not In My Back Yard!

And the whole debacle is going to cost all ratepayers in the region $167 MILLION more!  We're going to have to pay $167M to keep the Sacred Cows sacred and free from all that nasty infrastructure needed to power the data centers that keep their tax burden low.  What a world!

The real irony here may be the fact that a transmission line necessary for Loudoun's data centers has been pushed out of Loudoun and onto landowners in other states.

PJM claims it is not setting a precedent by re-routing a transmission line to spare certain rich and powerful people and dump it on others without the resources to fight back.

How are you enjoying the email bombardment, PJM?  The Sacred Cows just couldn't wait to strut their arrogance for the people impacted by the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project and assure them that if they, too, started having a tantrum at PJM that they could have the transmission line moved out of their community, also.

See?  I'm already right about that.  PJM IS setting a precedent that if you don't want a transmission line in your community you simply have to make some demands and pull the ejector button and you're spared, like magic!  But if PJM is NOT setting a precedent, like Stu assured me they were not last week, then PJM is going to have to explain to those folks in Maryland why they are not Sacred Cows that deserve special treatment.  What'll it be, PJM?

This question has been asked over and over and the answer is multi-faceted and much too long for Facebook.

First, let's acknowledge that existing transmission lines in the region are serving a purpose.  They are providing a public service to provide electricity to customers.  Public utilities have service territories, where they either generate power or buy power to serve their customers.  They may own some of the transmission lines in their service territory, but sometimes another utility may own a line through their territory that was constructed to serve its own customers elsewhere.  You would have to do some research to find out who owns any particular transmission line you see.

A utility owns both the transmission line and the existing easement or property it sits on.  The easement has to be a certain size to meet safety code requirements.  The bigger the lines, the bigger the easement.  The utility has exclusive rights to the easement it owns, and the transmission lines on it.  The company paid for and constructed that line, and it was only allowed to take the amount of land it needed for the line, and no more.  The cost of this public service is reimbursed to the company by ratepayers who use it.

When the line needs repairs, the company that owns it is responsible.  When the line needs to be upgraded, the company that owns it is responsible.  Under current law, a company would have "first dibs" to upgrade or expand its line when it's needed.  Some have asked why PSEG cannot use eminent domain to take another company's line and use the land for the MPRP?  Utilities are immune to eminent domain in most cases.  Isn't it ironic, since they can use it on us?  Utilities are immune to eminent domain because they are providing a public service on that land.  If another entity was allowed to take that land from them, there wouldn't be a transmission line and the public service of providing electricity would end.  I'm sure you can appreciate that nobody is going to take the lines that serve you.

Therefore, PSEG has no right to take another company's transmission line that is in use and tear it down to erect their own line.  Heck, PSEG is not even a legal public utility in Maryland and has no utility rights at all at this time.  If that line needs to be rebuilt, the company that owns it has "first dibs" to rebuild it on the easement it already owns.

Some have asked why PSEG can't just hang some new wires on the existing towers owned by another utility?  Because those towers were not designed to carry that extra circuit.  Transmission towers are structurally engineered to carry the load they are designed for.  They are the property of the utility that owns them to use to maintain and expand its own system when needed.  If BGE was ordered to let PSEG use its transmission system for its own line, what would happen when BGE needed another line?  It would have to take a new right-of-way, since PSEG had used theirs for its own line.  PSEG cannot own a line that is on someone else's right-of-way.  Furthermore, it would be unsafe to try to string some new lines on a tower that doesn't even have a place to put them.  Sometimes, transmission companies think ahead a bit and build oversized towers that leave room for a future circuit to be added.  That is not the case in the MPRP area.  

So, what is PSEG doing in Maryland anyhow if they're not a public utility that serves customers in the state?  Our regional transmission system is operated and planned by a regional transmission operator called PJM Interconnection.  PJM makes sure the system is safe and reliable and that your lights stay on.  PJM is constantly monitoring its system, which consists of transmission lines owned by many of its members, like BG&E, or PSEG.  PJM runs a robust planning process and orders new lines, upgrades, and rebuilds that are recommended by its Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC).  TEAC meetings are held once a month, and are open to the public.  But most of what PJM talks about is way too complicated for regular people and they are generally not involved.

Last year, PJM opened a new planning window to find transmission solutions to a reliability problem caused by 7,500MW of increased data center load in Northern Virginia, combined with 11,000MW of generation closing around the region.  Numerous companies submitted 72 different project ideas for PJM's consideration.  For big projects such as this, PJM's planning process is competitive.  That means all those transmission ideas were competing with each other to be selected.  PJM evaluated them for constructability and price, trying to find the best projects that solved the reliability problem for the cheapest price.  In order to be competitive, some companies submitted their project ideas with financial cost caps that would guarantee a final price for the project, no matter what happens in the mean time.  There are all sorts of ways to increase the price even with a cost cap, but I'm not going to get into that really complicated topic just now.

Maryland public utility BGE submitted a bunch of project ideas wrapped into a package in conjunction with other local public utilities.  None of those projects had cost caps.  While they had estimated costs attached, they are not held to the estimate.  Spend as much as you want!  One of the project ideas in this package was to rebuild  existing transmission lines from Pennsylvania to a substation named Brighton.  That project did not connect with the Doubs substation.  It looked like this:

This transmission idea wasn't just one transmission project but a series of transmission upgrades that were considered as a package.  None of these lines connected to Doubs, which feeds power to Northern Virginia.  We do not know why BGE didn't propose connecting to Doubs, and we don't really know why PJM selected PSEG's MPRP project instead.  The only clue we have is PJM's project evaluation risk matrix.

PJM decided that PSEG's MPRP was the best project in this list, and they ordered it and assigned it to PSEG.  PSEG is being held to its guarantee that it will have this project finished on time and on budget.  It is in a big ol' hurry because, for PSEG, time is money.

Once PJM selects and orders a transmission project, it's like a momma bear with a cub.  PJM will protect that transmission project and refuse to second guess itself at all costs.  The only thing that can stop PJM is a denial by the state utility commission in the state(s) where the project is located.  In that case, PJM will have to go back to the drawing board and start its planning process all over again.  Because these are competitive projects, PJM can't just pick another one.

There have only been two instances where PJM has made a change to a transmission project it ordered.  The first occurred several years ago when it was facing a denial of its planned Independence Energy Connection by the Maryland Public Service Commission.  It got that far, folks, right up until decision time!  In that instance, there was a locally-owned and operated transmission line that had recently been built that had room for another circuit (remember the planning ahead thing?).  Citizens asked why PJM had assigned a whole new transmission line on new easements to a non-local transmission company similar to PSEG when there was an existing line with open space that could hold a new circuit on the existing towers.  The Maryland PSC wanted to know also, and PJM and the transmission company fell on its sword and re-assigned that part of the project to the local utility to construct on its existing towers.  However, there were other parts to this project in Western Pennsylvania that were not changed because there was no existing transmission line with room for another circuit.  Only part of that project was changed, and the company continued trying to get approval from Pennsylvania.  Pennsylvania denied their permit and the entire project was shelved.  Turns out the years-long delay in permitting obviated the project and it was no longer needed anyhow.  The project was never built.

The second instance is happening right now.  PJM selected a transmission line connecting West Virginia coal-fired power plants with Loudoun County, Virginia's "data center alley."  A portion of this project is a greenfield line through western Loudoun on new easements.  When PJM evaluated this project, it noted that obtaining approval for new easements in Loudoun  might be a problem, so it created a "work around" on a different route, if needed.  PJM planned for this project's route in Loudoun to be rejected.  Just as PJM thought, the people in Loudoun opposed the line, and they used their money and political power to get their county government to demand PJM pull the ejector button and put the project on the alternate route.  PJM is currently considering the re-route.  However, this re-route is not exactly on "existing rights-of-way," no matter how they try to spin it.  The re-route "along existing lines" expands the existing easement and takes more property from people on the existing line using eminent domain.  The people on the re-route got mowed over by the important people in Loudoun who didn't want to have any impacts from new transmission to serve Loudoun's data centers.  They were stabbed in the back and thrown under the bus in order to save the rich people in Virginia's wine and horse country.  And they're going to remember it for a long, long time.

"Using existing rights-of-way" is not always the panacea it seems.  It's basically a NIMBY argument and pushes impacts on to others.  Even when a transmission line is rebuilt entirely on existing easements, there are still impacts from construction, as well as permanent impacts from having much higher voltage running on an easement you may be so unlucky to have on your property.  Rebuilds need new access roads for construction.  A new gravel road across your field, even temporary, will cause permanent and lasting impacts.  Just try getting all the rock out of there afterwards, or fixing the compaction that has happened.  You probably won't enjoy living with the construction traffic on it during construction either.  A rebuild on the existing easement may take out more trees along the easement, proclaiming them "danger trees" to the new transmission line.  It's a way of widening the easement without actually paying you anything.  Rebuilds aren't fun for the people who are subject to them, and horrendous for people whose home gets gobbled up by an expanded easement.

The lesson here is that moving a planned transmission line to an existing easement has only happened under certain circumstances.  The first is having space available to take a new line on existing towers.  That isn't present with MPRP.  The second was PJM having an alternate route already in mind.  That also isn't present with MPRP.

Getting PJM to change its mind and cancel MPRP entirely in favor of some other project that has not even been proposed is a very heavy lift.  So heavy, in fact, it may be nearly impossible.  PJM will have to be forced into it, and that's not going to happen quickly, easily, or inexpensively.  If you want to pursue this strategy, my advice is to hire a licensed engineer with experience and credentials working cases just like this before a regulatory commission to take a look at the PJM system and come up with an alternate plan.  Citizens don't have the right credentials to design the transmission system and PJM will just ignore them (and the PSC will ignore them as well).  You need to point to a viable plan that has been thoroughly vetted by a professional with experience designing the transmission system.  Even then, PJM will fight you on this and attack your expert.  He needs to be flameproof.  But, if you're in it for the long haul, this is your avenue, and the choice is yours.  It won't be quick.  It won't be cheap.  It won't be easy.  

Perhaps by the time you're done fighting that very long battle (with no guarantee of success) the transmission line will have obviated itself.  The data centers aren't going to wait around for a new extension cord that is mired in years of legal battle, they're going to go somewhere else with available power.

If you're going to find another solution for MPRP, make sure it's one that the entire community finds acceptable, otherwise you're playing into the NIMBY game PJM and PSEG hopes you will play.  Nobody really wins that game.  Someone alway gets stabbed in the back and tossed under the bus to save yourself.  The transmission planners and companies want you to do this because they're the ones who win... they get to have their project and someone who has to live with it is miserable.

There are plenty of transmission projects that have been cancelled entirely without anyone being thrown to the wolves because the community came together and presented a united front... we won't have this here in our community in any way, shape, or form.

​Good luck, MPRP opponents!  Carry on!

Get your hip waders, folks, it's going to get deep in here!

Last night I attended the MPRP "Open House" in Brunswick.  It made the guy from Assedo pretty nervous that we wouldn't sign in and give them our information, but he said we were welcome to look around.  So, I did.  I think maybe he changed his mind later when he spied us chatting with the reporter from Fox because he found it so intriguing he needed to document it with photographs.  I saw you, dude.  Somehow, I don't think PSEG is going to be using those photos for public relations purposes.

MPRP's "Open House" was right out of the utility playbook.  Free food and beverage, free tchotchkes, and plenty of free propaganda from subject matter "experts" that sometimes couldn't stay within their specialties.  Most of them were very nice, heck, they're just doing a job.  A couple were quite snotty when they realized I knew they were blowing smoke.  And I got so far under the PJM guy's skin that he started "m'am"-ing me.  The sickest part of these open house meetings to me is always the Indoctrination Station for the kiddos.

Don't leave your kids here coloring propaganda under the watchful eye of strangers.

The first stop was the table with the PJM guy.  Stu Widom had lots of helpful information, but didn't know much about the actual planning process, and it showed.  Got himself all tweaked when I mentioned the precedent PJM has recently set by changing the route of a different project so it doesn't affect wealthy and politically connected people in Virginia's wine and horse country.  Why don't you ask Stu about that tonight?  He likes to pretend that it was for "environmental reasons" but it was nothing of the sort!  The new route crosses the C&O Canal NHP TWICE.  Environmental my foot.  Of course, poking the rich and powerful might affect Stu's own personal environment as one of PJM's political schmoozers, so maybe that's what he meant?  He obviously wasn't there to talk with citizens, but to use his bee smoker on any angry legislators or government officials who showed up.

Next I talked to one of the land agent ladies, who pretended that's not what she was.  I asked her when they were going to release the land agents on the citizens impacted by this project and she acted all confused.  I asked her if land agents would be calling on people BEFORE or AFTER the Maryland Public Service Commission approves this project.  She assured me land agents would only contact you AFTER the MD PSC approves.  We both knew she was full of it, and my investigation of regulatory filings this morning confirms

Busted!  Those land agents will be on your doorstep as soon as the routing is completed in September.

Next was one of the routing guys who told me this project was needed to supply electricity to the local area.  I told him he was wrong, then he admitted that he wasn't the subject matter expert on that.  He suggested I go over to Stu's table to find the answer to that question.  I said I'd already been there and maybe HE should go talk to Stu.  He refused, so I suggested that he not lie to people about that anymore,

I talked with a delightful young lady at the structure/electrical engineering poster.  She showed me the selected H-frame structures and told me the poles were 40 feet apart and that it would be possible to drive farm equipment between them.  I asked her what happens if someone tried that and accidentally clipped one of the poles and it fell over.  Who would be liable?  She didn't know.  I didn't suggest that she volunteer for a farm machinery rodeo, where the power company person stands in a field with their arms outstretched and pretends to be a transmission tower while farmers see how close they can drive their gigantic pieces of equipment to the "tower" without knocking it over.

I talked with another routing lady who confirmed that paralleling existing transmission lines can actually be MORE destructive than cutting new greenfield lines.  We talked about how homes and other structures are often sited right outside transmission rights of way that have existed for decades.  Paralleling that corridor with a new 150-ft wide easement would destroy everything adjacent to the existing corridor.  She said MPRP would go around homes rather than over or through them, but had to minimize how many times its line crossed the existing line.  There was also a problem where a home stood on either side of the existing easement, preventing expansion on either side.  She didn't know what MPRP would do in that instance.  One of those homes would have to be sacrificed, that's what.  Whichever side of the existing easement has more homes wins.  However, when MPRP uses new easements, it can go around any home or other obstruction and won't have to destroy anyone's home.

And finally, I talked with PSEG's staff lawyer, who happened to be sitting at Stu's table.

Very nice person who pretty much told the truth and had the answers to my rather unique questions.  She admitted that perhaps some of the other "experts" at the meeting may be making crap up and she had asked them not to do that.  I grilled her on PSEG's federal regulatory filings and cost recovery system.  This morning I found the documents and they mostly confirmed what she told me. 

​PSEG has applied at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to be granted three transmission incentives.  The first is the Abandoned Plant Incentive.  If granted, PSEG would be able to recover all its prudent expenditures on MPRP in the event that it is abandoned before being built through no fault of PSEG.  This would include if cannot get the permits it needs, or if PJM's need for the project changes.  The second is to set a preliminary debt/equity ratio of 55/45%.  This isn't anything to get concerned about.  The third incentive is recovery of PSEG's expenses related to this project once the project has an approved formula rate.  PSEG's initial expenditures will be recovered over a 5-year period once it has a recovery method.  This means that all the money PSEG has spent preparing this project for PJM, ushering it through PJM's competitive process, it's legal costs to make those FERC filings, the cost of all its contractors (routing, engineering, land acquisition, public relations), the food, the coloring books, even those cute little hardhat flashlight keychains (be sure to get one!).  Everything PSEG has already spent will end up added to ratepayer bills once it has its formula rate established.  The one made up fib the lawyer told was that PSEG was paying for all the current costs of the project out of the goodness of their hearts.  I hope she knew as well as I did that those costs were being put in an account as a regulatory asset that would be recovered (with interest) at a later date.

First, PSEG is waiting for FERC to approve its incentives.  Afterwards, PSEG will file for approval of its formula rate and rate of return.  Bet your eyes glazed over just then, right?  Stick with me here...  A formula rate is a set of tables that calculate a yearly rate based on numbers that the transmission company plugs in from their ledger.  As things are paid for, the costs get added to certain accounts, and the account totals get transferred to the formula rate on a yearly basis.  The number that comes out the end of the formula is the amount that electric consumers pay for the transmission project on a yearly basis.  A rate of return is how much interest the company earns on its capital expenses.  That includes physical assets, like transmission lines, land they sit on, and it also includes the cost of building them in the first place.  It's heady stuff, but anyone with a little accounting experience can handle it just fine.

Once the formula rate and rate of return is set by FERC, you can help PSEG look over its costs every year to make sure they don't include any costs in their formula rate that shouldn't be charged to ratepayers.

To wrap up... I urge you to download and read PSEG's application for FERC incentives.  It may answer a bunch of the questions I have seen swirling around, such as where's the data proving need?  Why was this project selected instead of upgrading existing lines?  If you have questions, why not take them to the PSEG attorney at tonight's meeting?  She's fun to talk to.  Be nice. 

Another utility "dog and pony show" in the books.  Don't expect to accomplish much.  MPRP isn't going to be stopped at any of these meetings, but attending is your first step.  It's simply a networking opportunity.  Come hungry.  As one landowner remarked at one of these shows years ago... "We might as well eat.  It might be all we get."

The MidAtlantic Resiliency Link, or MARL, transmission project has been assigned by PJM Interconnection to two different transmission builders.  NextEra is assigned to build the majority of it, but FirstEnergy ended up with the portion that runs through Frederick County, VA and Jefferson County, WV.

Long ago, even before PJM ordered MARL, NextEra filed an application for transmission incentives with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  FERC approved them back in January.  Nobody bothered to get involved and comment or protest.

Everyone's been treading water, waiting to get more information, but neither NextEra or FirstEnergy has held public meetings to share information with impacted communities.  Seems like nobody is in a hurry at all.

Remember that when PJM ordered MARL, it said the project was needed to be operating by June 1, 2027 or else there would be darkness.

Back in May, FirstEnergy finally got around to requesting transmission incentives for its portion of the MARL.  It asked FERC to grant it the abandoned plant incentive.  Grant of the abandoned plant incentive begins the tally of project costs that can be recovered if the project is abandoned (cancelled) before being built.  Anything FirstEnergy spends before receiving this incentive is only eligible to be recovered at 50%.  That would mean that FirstEnergy could only collect half of the money it spends on MARL in the case of abandonment.  The other half would come out of FirstEnergy's pocket.  Fitting, don't you think, since FirstEnergy insisted on being assigned this portion that rebuilds and expands lines FirstEnergy already owns?  However, that's not what FirstEnergy asked FERC for... it asked FERC to allow it to recover 100% of whatever it has spent (plus interest) if the project is abandoned.

FERC Commissioner Mark Christie is at war against certain transmission incentives.  FERC opened a rulemaking to examine and revise its incentives more than 4 years ago, but has punted it to the side without action, allowing the overly generous incentives to continue.  
​
I'm taking this opportunity to object to FirstEnergy's request for the abandoned plant incentive.  Do they really need it, since they were so eager to have this project that they engineered some secret deal behind the scenes at PJM?  

NextEra's cost cap for MARL (as crappy as it is) did not transfer to FirstEnergy when it took over this section of the project.  FirstEnergy can and will spend however much it wants... currently estimated at $341M for a very short "rebuild" segment.  How much will they actually spend, and how soon will they spend it?  How much spending is planned *before* state approvals, which if denied can cause abandonment?  FERC should place a limit on running up the spending before project approval.

These are the comments I submitted to FERC.

And here's the worst part!  As part of their filing, FirstEnergy included a copy of its acceptance letter of PJM's designation of a portion of the MARL.  In their acceptance, FirstEnergy has changed the in-service dates for its portion of the MARL.  The Virginia portions (both in Frederick and Loudoun counties) are supposed to be in-service by June 1, 2028, delayed a year from the date PJM said they were needed.  The in-service date for the West Virginia portion in Jefferson County is delayed until June 1, 2030.  That's right... 2030!  MARL is not planned to be completed and transmitting energy until 2030!  That's six years from now!  Are Virginia's data centers going to hang around waiting to build and be connected to the electric grid for another 6 years?

NO!  They won't wait.  They will go somewhere else where they can build a data center and get electric service before 2030.  The bottom may be about to fall out of Virginia's data center craze.

​Here's what FirstEnergy's acceptance letter looks like:

Once the in-service date for PJM's transmission projects starts slipping, it often keeps slipping... right off into oblivion.  It can be delayed if expected load doesn't show up (but goes elsewhere). It can be delayed if the utilities run into permitting problems, such as taking a state denial in a NIETC to FERC for permitting.  It can be delayed if the utilities have difficulty procuring project components; there is a huge supply chain issue for transmission components right now.  It can be delayed if there are issues with land acquisition.  It can (and will) be delayed even further.  And, as I said in my comments...

Giving these transmission companies the greenlight to spend as much of our money as they want before they finally abandon MARL many years in the future is not just and reasonable.

FirstEnergy has asked FERC to approve its incentive request before July 15.  Once consumers have thus insured the reimbursement of FirstEnergy's project spending, then maybe FirstEnergy can actually start working on MARL.

But what happens if FERC doesn't grant this incentive?  Will FirstEnergy still want to build its part of the MARL?  Or will it have to go back to PJM for revision?

​Stay tuned...