Luzerne County Council urged to put pressure on PPL over proposed transmission line

Two actions requested by a group opposing a new PPL Electric Utilities transmission line through several rural southern Luzerne County communities have been added to Tuesday’s county council meeting agenda — one for a vote and the other for discussion only.

In response, PPL sent council a communication outlining its position.

The utility is proposing a 12-mile, 500kV transmission line from the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station nuclear power plant in Salem Township to the area of the Humboldt Industrial Park, with the line cutting through Nescopeck, Black Creek, Sugarloaf and Hazle townships. PPL said that project will provide additional power and support existing and future load growth.

PPL has easements for the line but needs to widen them to proceed, which means the utility may seek to exercise its eminent domain power if property owners won’t agree to expanded easements, officials have said.

Sugarloaf Township resident John Zola, who is among the impacted residential property owners, created the Alliance to Stop the Line group opposing the project and is pushing county council to take actions attempting to put pressure on PPL to use a different route for the line.

Council is set to vote on a resolution Tuesday encouraging PPL to pursue alternatives, at the urging of county Councilman Harry Haas.

Zola also asked council to immediately suspend all real estate tax breaks granted the last two years for projects south of the Salem Township power plant and issue a temporary moratorium preventing future tax breaks for projects in the same geographic area that would be using the new transmission line.

Several council members said the county cannot suspend tax breaks already awarded because the county would be sued, but Haas requested council consideration of a moratorium.

A proposed moratorium drafted by Haas is up for discussion at Tuesday’s work session, which follows the voting meeting. Majority council passage would be necessary at a future meeting for a moratorium to take effect.

Tom Reilly, president of Reilly Associates in Pittston — the county’s outside engineer — told council during a work session earlier this month that PPL would have to obtain a certificate of public convenience from the Public Utility Commission to exercise its eminent domain powers.

The PUC would hold a hearing and allow impacted citizens to present evidence of potential viable alternate routes and the negative impacts the current route would have on the community, Reilly said. PPL also would have to demonstrate evidence the project is needed, Reilly said.

“This is a critical element for those who have concerns about the route to marshal expertise in sharing environmental and legal expertise on the issue,” Reilly said. “There’s a process of proving that the public right to have this approved is more important than the right of the property owners.”

Council Chairman John Lombardo told Reilly he also spoke to a PUC representative and verified a PUC hearing “would be the next logical step” for residents in opposition of the plan.

Zola said his group is fully aware of the PUC process, which has not yet been requested by PPL, but he asserted the residents would have a “very, very small” chance of succeeding and would have to spend a “whole lot of money that people don’t have” to oppose the utility company.

Instead, residents are asking elected officials to take measures attempting to “bring everybody to the table” hoping PPL will choose another route instead of proceeding with a PUC hearing for the current plan that Zola asserted would equate to “destroying lives.”

Specifically, his group suggests PPL upgrade and/or add a new line parallel to an existing one.

Council’s proposed voting agenda resolution urging PPL to pursue other options for the line said PPL’s current plan follows a 200-foot-wide service road “that cuts directly through the most pristine and picturesque part of the Nescopeck/Sugarloaf Valley.”

“Residents have stated the project would involve the installation of 240-foot-tall industrial utility poles in residential neighborhoods, exposing residents to live with constant noise from humming high-voltage lines, increased exposure to static electricity and visual blight of massive poles outside their windows,” it said.

Residents also have argued toxic herbicides used to maintain the right-of-way would “put children, grandchildren, pets and the environment at serious risk,” it said.

PPL response

PPL Senior Director of Public and Regulatory Affairs Shelby A. Linton-Keddie sent county council a communication last week outlining its position and requested reading of the letter during the public comment portion of Tuesday’s meeting.

The letter, as written:

PPL Electric Utilities appreciates the opportunity to provide comments regarding the transmission line project and resolution that is scheduled for discussion at your upcoming public meeting. We value the county’s interest in this important infrastructure initiative and welcome the opportunity to share our perspective.

The proposed Sugarloaf Project is designed to meet the growing electricity demand in Luzerne County and support long-term economic development. As you are aware, the greater Hazleton area continues to attract manufacturers and large power users, and we anticipate electricity demand in the region to grow significantly — up to 16 times current levels by 2030.

To meet this demand, PPL Electric plans to construct approximately 12 miles of new transmission line and two new switchyards, utilizing an existing right-of-way corridor to minimize environmental and community impact. This project will enhance reliability and resilience for all customers in the region and is part of a broader effort to modernize the electric grid.

We understand that new infrastructure can raise concerns, and we are committed to working closely with landowners to minimize impacts. Our approach includes fair compensation for easements, transparent communication and ongoing landowner and stakeholder engagement. The project will require review and approval from the PUC, and we anticipate construction to begin in spring 2026 with completion by fall 2027.

After reviewing a draft of the proposed Luzerne County resolution, PPL Electric would like to clarify the following points to address questions and concerns expressed:

• There is a need for the project to support the exponential economic growth in the Northeast Pennsylvania region. As a public utility, PPL Electric has an obligation to serve all customers. When there is projected load growth in an area, we are required to take prudent steps to meet that demand; the company does not get to pick and choose which customers it wishes to serve.

• There will not be a 200-foot-wide service road. Instead, PPL Electric will use existing service roads from the prior 69 kV transmission line to the extent practical. New access roads may also be installed as needed to support the construction and operation of the line. Typical access roads are approximately 20 feet wide, and if the company does not have permanent access road rights, it will restore the access road to its prior condition when construction is complete.

• PPL Electric is not creating a new transmission corridor. The project, as proposed, utilizes an existing corridor operating on easements the company has held for over a century.

• While PPL Electric seeks to use existing right-of-way (ROW) to build the new line, we have sought to widen the existing ROW to 200 feet to reduce the number and height of structures required for the new line. This widening is pursued in part to lessen the impact on landowners.

• The new line is not disrupting pristine land. It will utilize an existing transmission corridor that, until recently, had a transmission line in place. To the extent houses now exist near the corridor, they were built after the transmission easement was established, with full knowledge of PPL Electric’s rights on the property. In addition, we have no evidence that there is a long-term effect on property values from a project like this.

• There is no threat to the environment. Our track record shows that we work cooperatively with regulatory agencies, obtain all required permits and meet all environmental requirements and regulations under the terms of our permits. Once built, the transmission line involves minimal activity, and its environmental impact is minimal.

• The health and safety concerns as articulated in the resolution are misguided. PPL Electric safely operates thousands of miles of transmission lines across its service territory, including areas more densely populated than the Sugarloaf Valley region. All lines are constructed in accordance with applicable safety standards.

• Additionally, the alternative routes listed in the draft resolution are not viable solutions. These proffered routes would be more disruptive from land use, environmental and constructability standpoints, or would violate PJM Interconnection reliability criteria. The proposed alternatives are also within the Nescopeck/Sugarloaf Valley region, and changing the route would shift the impact from one group of landowners to another. As such, without new information, the company at this time has no plans to either pause this project or choose an alternative route, since the route we will be submitting to the PUC later this year is the one that has the least environmental and community impact.

PPL Electric looks forward to continued dialogue with council members and landowners who have questions or concerns about this project. Customers and the community can access information about the project online at sugarloafproject.com, where a dedicated email address is also available. We believe that open dialogue is essential and welcome the opportunity to provide additional information and address any issues directly.

Tuesday’s council meeting is at 6 p.m. in the county courthouse on River Street in Wilkes-Barre. Instructions for the remote attendance option will be posted under council’s public online meetings link at luzernecounty.org.