NextEra responds to PSC staff motion to pause MARL project process
Trending
MORGANTOWN - NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic has submitted to the Public Service Commission its response to the staff motion to pause the application process for its MidAtlantic Resiliency Link Project.
NextEra, in its Friday filing, noted that it joined with PSC staff to request that the PSC extend its decision date for its MidAtlantic Resiliency Link Project for 77 days, moving it from March 6, 2027, to May 22.
NextEra summarized the three concerns that prompted the staff motion: Proposed route revisions brought in newly affected landowners who need time to review the case and intervene in order to provide testimony, and raised questions about constructability of a portion of the route; a recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order regarding transmission planning and service to data centers raises unanswered questions about the application; and the need for the MARL Project is called into question by other transmission projects under development.
Regarding the proposed route revisions, NextEra told the PSC, "Route revisions of this nature are a routine and expected aspect of developing a transmission project of this scale and geographic complexity. They also serve the public interest, allowing the route to be refined both to reduce impacts on affected landowners and communities and to address terrain and constructability considerations that support the safe and reliable construction of the line."
One of the proposed revisions concerning topographic and steep terrain associated with the existing transmission line crossing, along with the other four, NextEra said, "reflect NEET MA’s [an abbreviation for NextEra] continuing commitment to responsive project development."
Revisions "are regularly proposed during projects of this type, complexity and magnitude," it said. NextEra wants all affected landowners to have the opportunity to participate in the process. And identifying the terrain issue before construction reflects diligence, not lack of diligence.
"Should similar refinements arise as the project moves forward, they should be welcomed as the system working as intended--not as a basis to seek delay or to pause the proceeding," NextEra said.
Regarding FERC’s June order, NextEra said that the order focuses on PJM’s lack of a clearly articulated study process to identify network upgrades and facilities needed to support the interconnection of a new data center - in other words, individual grid interconnections.
This is distinct, NextEra said, from PJM's regional planning process expressed in its Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP). MARL was identified under PJM's RTEP process as a necessary reliability solution to address forecasted generation deactivations, load growth, reactive power needs and other factors.
"MARL is an RTEP project, not a Network Upgrade identified in response to a discrete data center interconnection," NextEra said.
On the third issue, NextEra said, it welcomes the opportunity to address the questions raised in the staff motion regarding project need, in light of other projects in development, particularly the Joshua Falls-Yeat 765-kilovolt project in Virginia.
"The MARL project remains needed," NextEra said, "and PJM's selection of the Joshua Falls-Yeat project does not obviate that need. PJM's subsequent selection of the Joshua Falls-Yeat project in a later RTEP window presupposed that MARL would be in service, confirming that PJM determined that both projects are needed."
NextEra concluded, "NEET MA looks forward to working constructively with staff, affected landowners and all parties to address concerns raised in the staff motion. NEET MA remains committed to a thorough and transparent evidentiary record and to the timely development of the MARL Project for the benefit of the region."