Power Line Protest Meets Opposition, BGE Says Wires Are Necessary

A utility company says it has the right to build new power lines near Maryland homes, despite a protest from the affected property owners. The utility operator also says it would be more disruptive and costly to instead bury the lines.

Baltimore Gas & Electric proposed 39 miles of power line work in Baltimore and Harford counties to replace the electricity lost when an Anne Arundel County power plant retires.

Neighbors, however, are frustrated with the new poles that the lines would require. They also worry about how the construction would affect the environment and their properties.

Seven property owners in Baltimore and Harford counties were granted limited intervenor status and are presenting evidence against the power lines at hearings this week. The residents claim that the original 1931 deeds with BGE grant rights for "an electrical transmission line," not multiple lines.

BGE spokesperson Nick Alexopulos told Patch the property owners' claims "are inaccurate and based on incomplete information and misunderstanding of law."

"The relevant easement language clearly and unambiguously grants BGE unrestricted rights to construct, operate, modify, and maintain gas and electric facilities, plural, and also restricts property owners from interfering with BGE’s right to construct, operate and maintain existing, and future, facilities," Alexopulos told Patch in an email. "BGE is well within all appliable easement rights to construct this Project, which is required to help ensure the reliability of the grid for millions of Maryland customers."

The power lines would allow for the retirement of the Brandon Shores Generating Station in Curtis Bay. Talen Energy, owner of the 1,282-megawatt plant, hoped to close the coal-fired facility by June 2025.

PJM Interconnection — an independent, federally-regulated regional grid operator and planner — determined that grid upgrades were necessary to ensure Mid-Atlantic customers maintain reliable electricity after Brandon Shores closes.

PJM directed BGE to construct transmission lines and substations to offset this loss. Dubbed the Brandon Shores Retirement Mitigation (BSRM) Project, the new power lines would connect Maryland to Pennsylvania's grid to import electricity. PJM also instructed BGE's counterparts in southeastern Pennsylvania and the Washington, D.C., area to construct related upgrades.

The Brandon Shores Retirement Mitigation Project would cost $1.1 billion.

BGE plans to construct new power lines along 29 miles of right-of-way next to existing overhead transmission lines. The plan also calls for the replacement of existing wires along 8 miles of right-of-way. Another 2 miles of existing lines must be upgraded along the right-of-way.

Two new substations must be built, and three must be expanded or rebuilt.

The new stations would be located in Pasadena, near Solley Road and Nabbs Creek Road, and Rosedale, at the dead-end of Batavia Farm Road.

The power lines would start in Whiteford, Harford County at the Maryland-Pennsylvania border, head through Bel Air North and pass within a mile of Fallston Airport.

In Baltimore County, the lines would cross through Upper Falls, Gunpowder Falls State Park and Nottingham. The lines would continue through Rosedale and Dundalk before reaching the Patapsco River.

The Pasadena area is the only affected part of Anne Arundel County.

BGE considered burying the lines and using other routes, but Alexopulos said undergrounding the wires "is not feasible." It would be cheaper and simpler to use BGE's existing overhead right-of-way.

"Alternative routes were determined to be inferior to the Project, which will utilize existing BGE ROW that already contains existing transmission infrastructure and has the room to accommodate the Project," Alexopulos said. "The alternate routes considered were rejected due to longer length, new necessary ROW, larger community impacts, significant environmental/cultural impacts, and/or impacts to existing system infrastructure, all of which also drove higher costs and longer implementation times."

It would be five to 10 times more expensive to bury the lines. Maintenance and repairs are more complicated and costly for underground wires. BGE said less than 1% of U.S. transmission lines are underground.

Undergrounding the wires would also take more time, which BGE can't afford to lose.

PGM said the project must be in service by Dec. 31, 2028. To meet the deadline, BGE must begin construction in early 2026.

It's also more expensive to keep Brandon Shores open.

It could cost $250 million annually to keep Brandon Shores open past its planned closure date. BGE customers are currently paying Talen Energy $6 per month to keep the plant open. If the new power lines are completed, customers would instead pay $2 to $4 monthly for the new wires.

"Also, BGE determined that the environmental impacts of undergrounding the line would be significantly more than constructing the overhead line," Alexopulos said. "Relevant state agencies agree the impacts have been sufficiently mitigated in BGE’s project plan and that a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for this design should be granted."

BGE plans to mitigate disruptions by:

• Using existing access roads.
• Utilizing existing right-of-way.
• Installing sediment and erosion control in compliance with environmental regulators.
• Implementing a stormwater pollution protection plan.
• Following a construction plan that includes matting and the use of low ground or tract equipment in wetlands.
• Crossing via temporary access bridges to limit damage to waterways and aquatic wildlife.
• Placing new poles next to existing poles to minimize visual impacts.

BGE will not compensate customers for the project.

"There are no impacts to compensate for," Alexopulos said. "In this case, the project is occurring within existing ROW that is more than 65 years old in certain areas. Most development near the ROW has occurred since the line was originally constructed."

Project supporters and opponents are presenting their cases at evidentiary hearings this week before the Maryland Public Service Commission in Baltimore. Initial briefs from involved parties are due Nov. 7, and reply briefs are due Nov. 24.

Public Utility Law Judge Jennifer J. Grace will then issue a proposed order. If there's no appeal, her order becomes final.

If there is an appeal, the five public service commissioners will review the case and issue a final order.

More information on the project is posted here.

Related:

• Proposed Power Lines Protested By Home Owners In Baltimore, Harford Counties
• Piedmont Power Line Developer Wants Regulators To Move More Quickly Than Planned
• Review For Piedmont Power Line Will Take Until At Least February 2027, Maryland Regulators Say
• Piedmont Power Line Company Files A Second Lawsuit Against Defiant Landowners
• Maryland Landowners Appeal Ruling That Allows Surveys For Piedmont Power Line
• Federal Judge Grants Piedmont Power Line Company Access To Land For Surveys
• Controversial Power Line Project Opposed By Baltimore County Executive