OPC urges federal regulators to preserve competition for costly transmission projects
BALTIMORE – The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) should reject a complaint asking it to end competitive solicitation requirements for new transmission projects, the Office of People’s Counsel and other consumer advocates said in filings submitted to FERC last week.
“Competition provides a powerful check against utility monopoly control that leads to higher costs for customers,” said Maryland People’s Counsel David S. Lapp. “We should be expanding the use of competition to curb rapidly rising transmission costs—not reducing it.”
OPC’s filings opposed a complaint from several transmission-owning utilities seeking to eliminate rules that require competitive solicitation processes for certain new transmission facilities. Although the rules at issue apply to regional transmission operators in the Midwest, Maryland’s regional transmission operator, PJM Interconnection, LLC, has similar rules in place. OPC and other PJM consumer advocates joined in opposition to the complaint because of possible implications for PJM rules requiring competition.
Competition forces companies to “sharpen their pencils” and “find ways to decrease costs,” one filing says, noting how evidence shows that competitive bidding lowers costs and brings other consumer benefits, such as limitations on cost overruns, cost caps, and reduced financing costs.
OPC’s March 2026 report, PJM Transmission Cost Impacts on Electricity Customers in Maryland, found that transmission rates for Maryland utilities Pepco, Baltimore Gas and Electric, and Delmarva Power & Light have increased by a factor of five to six since 2010.
The report discussed so-called “immediate need” and “local” or “supplemental" transmission projects, both of which are currently exempt from competitive procurement requirements. Immediate need projects—identified by the regional system operator—are four times more costly, on average, than competitively procured projects across Maryland’s four transmission zones, the report found. One illustration is the transmission facilities that BGE and its owner, Exelon, are building to address the future retirement of the Baltimore-area Brandon Shores power plant. Because PJM determined they were “immediate need,” the transmission projects were not competitively procured, and Exelon’s initial cost estimate of $740 million grew after only about 18 months to over $1.5 billion.
“Local” or “supplemental” transmission projects—identified by local utilities—are also exempt from competition and evade meaningful cost review. OPC filed a FERC complaint challenging the regulatory gap for such projects in December of 2024, but FERC has yet to act on the complaint. Without competition and customer protections, the costs can far surpass initial estimates. For example, BGE’s planned local transmission projects for the Baltimore Peninsula grew from an initial estimate of $105 million, then to $407 million, and—most recently—to $520 million.
OPC’s filings last week were made jointly with other parties. One filing included residential consumer advocate agencies from states stretching from Colorado to Michigan to Delaware. A second protest included numerous large industrial and transmission customer organizations. The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA) also filed a protest, noting competition’s role in limiting growing transmission costs. Lapp serves on NASUCA’s executive committee.
The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel is an independent state agency that represents Maryland’s residential consumers of electric, natural gas, telecommunications, private water and certain transportation matters before the Public Service Commission, federal regulatory agencies and the courts.
* * *
|
