Bill
SB 34
Requires PSC to weigh conservation easements when siting new overhead transmission lines, prompting route alternatives and minimization or rerouting to protect conserved lands.
Status
- Introduced January 8, 2025; assigned to the Senate Education, Energy, and the Environment Committee.
- Effective date in bill text: October 1, 2025 (if enacted).
- Cross‑file: HB 640.
Purpose and intent
- Require the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) to explicitly consider and limit impacts of proposed new overhead transmission lines on properties that lie within proposed routes and are subject to existing conservation easements. The change is intended to give greater weight to protected lands when siting large overhead transmission projects subject to a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN).
Key provisions
- Adds conservation‑easement considerations to the CPCN review for new overhead transmission lines (in addition to existing CPCN factors such as system reliability, costs, aesthetics, local recommendations, etc.).
- For new overhead transmission line applications, PSC must consider:
- The alternative routes the applicant evaluated (including estimated capital and operating costs and reasons for rejecting alternatives); and
- The impact of the proposed line on properties in those alternative routes that are subject to existing conservation easements.
- Requires the CPCN applicant to:
- Identify if the proposed line is located on property that is subject to an existing easement; and
- Either (A) minimize the impact on properties in the proposed route that are subject to conservation easements, or (B) change the proposed route to reduce impact on such properties.
- Leaves other CPCN requirements intact (public notice, local government recommendations, PJM/NERC/FERC obligations, etc.).
Definition (as used by statute)
- “Conservation easement” refers to an easement, covenant, restriction, or condition on real property held by entities such as the Maryland Environmental Trust, Maryland Historical Trust, Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation, DNR, county/municipal easements funded through DNR/Rural Legacy/local agricultural programs, recognized land trusts, or easements required by permits from the Maryland Department of the Environment.
Who is affected
- Utilities and developers seeking CPCNs for new overhead transmission lines (typically >69 kV per existing law).
- Landowners and easement holders (state agencies, land trusts, farmland preservation programs, historic preservation entities) whose properties lie in proposed routes.
- PSC (regulatory review and permitting), local governments (whose recommendations are part of CPCN consideration), and potentially project opponents/supporters during public review.
Potential impacts
- Procedural: CPCN applicants must document alternative routes and impacts to conserved lands and demonstrate minimization or rerouting steps; PSC will factor easement impacts into approval decisions.
- Project design/cost: Additional routing constraints could increase route length or project costs, or require engineering/design adjustments to reduce impacts to conserved properties.
- Conservation: Provides stronger procedural protection for lands under conservation easement by requiring explicit consideration and mitigation during siting.
- Fiscal: State analysis indicates PSC can implement the requirement within existing resources and the bill is not expected to materially affect State or local finances.
Procedural notes
- CPCN process remains the mechanism to authorize construction; PSC retains authority to approve, condition, or deny CPCN requests after statutorily required considerations and public processes are completed.
- The bill supplements existing CPCN factors; it does not prohibit construction across easement lands but requires applicants and PSC to prioritize impact minimization or route changes.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
