WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 640

Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity – Overhead Transmission Lines – Conservation Easements

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Nick Allen and 20 co-sponsors

PSC must minimize or reroute new overhead transmission lines to protect lands under conservation easements when reviewing CPCN applications.

Hearing 2/20 at 1:00 p.m.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 640

HB 640 — Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity: Overhead Transmission Lines — Conservation Easements (Maryland)

Main purpose / intent

Require the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) to explicitly consider and limit the impact of proposed new overhead electric transmission lines on properties subject to existing conservation easements when reviewing Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) applications — and to require applicants to minimize such impacts or change the proposed route.

Key provisions

  • Amends Article — Public Utilities, §7‑207(f) (CPCN for overhead transmission lines).
  • Before final action on a CPCN for a new overhead transmission line, PSC must consider:
    • The alternative routes the applicant considered (existing requirement), and
    • The impact of the proposed overhead transmission line on properties located in the alternative route(s) that are subject to an existing conservation easement (NEW).
  • Requires CPCN applicants to:
    • Identify whether the proposed line would be built on property subject to an existing easement (already required in part); and
    • Either minimize impacts on properties within the proposed route that are subject to existing conservation easements, or alter the proposed route to reduce those impacts (NEW).
  • Leaves intact other PSC considerations (need/demand, costs of alternatives, environmental and community impacts, obligations to PJM/FERC/NERC, etc.).
  • Effective date in the bill text (if enacted): October 1, 2025.

Context / current law

  • Under current Maryland law a CPCN is required before constructing overhead transmission lines >69 kV; PSC already must consider alternative routes, community and environmental impacts, and obtain local government recommendations.
  • The bill adds conservation‑easement–specific considerations and a minimization/change‑route requirement to that CPCN review framework.

Who is affected

  • Electric transmission developers and utilities filing CPCN applications in Maryland (may need additional routing analysis, redesign, or mitigation).
  • Owners and holders of conservation easements (Maryland Environmental Trust, DNR, Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation, local governments, land trusts, etc.) whose protected properties lie in considered routes.
  • PSC (review obligations) — fiscal note indicates PSC can implement requirements with existing budgeted resources.
  • Local governments and other stakeholders participating in CPCN proceedings.

Fiscal and procedural notes

  • Department of Legislative Services fiscal note: PSC can handle the bill’s requirements with existing resources; no material State or local fiscal impact anticipated; minimal small business effect.
  • Procedural status (as reported in provided materials): assigned to Economic Matters; hearing scheduled February 20 (1:00 p.m.). The bill text sets an effective date of October 1, 2025 if enacted.

Practical impact

  • Could increase emphasis on protecting lands under conservation easements during transmission siting, potentially leading to route changes, additional mitigation measures, or more detailed impact analyses in CPCN applications.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.