Proposed Power Lines Protested By MD Home Owners

Seven property owners in Baltimore and Harford counties will testify this week against power lines that are proposed near their homes.

The power lines would help replace the electricity from an Anne Arundel County power plant slated for closure.

The property owners are fighting the proposed construction of 29 miles of additional high-voltage transmission lines. The lines are part of the BrandonShores Retirement Mitigation (BSRM) Project.

Brandon Shores, a coal-fired power plant located in Curtis Bay, was slated to close in June 2025. Operators are still finalizing a plan for how they would cover the energy output lost with the looming Brandon Shores closure.

It could cost $250 million annually to keep Brandon Shores open past its planned closure date. WBAL-TV reported that customers already pay about $6 each month to continue running the plant, but the cost will drop to roughly $4 per month if the project proceeds.

"Once the project is in service, they'll be paying a little less on their bill than they are right now," said Nick Alexopulos, senior communications manager for Baltimore Gas & Electric, according to WBAL. "The bottom line is to pay for all of the power needs in Maryland, it costs money."

That's where the new power lines come in.

The BSRM Project, led by BGE, seeks to import electricity from Pennsylvania to replace the lost power.

No More Power Lines, a Kingsville grassroots group, opposes the project.

"Rather than investing in new in-state generation, the project will make Maryland increasingly dependent on out-of-state energy sources," No More Power Lines said in a Tuesday press release. "Residents across both counties have voiced strong opposition, citing the project’s environmental risks, property value impacts, higher electric costs, increased exposure to harmful electromagnetic fields (EMFs), and potential wildfire hazards."

The property owners testifying this week live along the BGE right-of-way. They have been granted limited intervenor status in Case No. 9748 before the Maryland Public Service Commission. They will appear at this week's evidentiary hearings to oppose the proposed construction.

The evidentiary hearings will be live streamed Tuesday through Friday, beginning at 10 a.m. daily, on the Maryland Public Service Commission's YouTube channel. Members of the public are welcome to attend the hearings, which are being held in Baltimore on the 16th floor of the William Donald Schaefer Building at 6 St. Paul St.

"The proposed route cuts directly through Gunpowder Falls State Park, traverses the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area, and passes within one mile of Fallston Airport," No More Power Lines said in the release. "Eleven of the proposed monopoles exceed Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Maryland Aviation Administration (MAA) height standards as planes approach the airport runway,"

The Baltimore County Council unanimously passed Resolution 37-24 in August 2024, urging BGE to minimize community impacts and bury transmission lines where feasible. The resolution encouraged burying power lines through parkland and rural areas that could serve as wildfire corridors.

No More Power Lines said, "BGE made no meaningful design changes in response."

Council Member David Marks (R-Upper Falls) introduced Resolution 21-25 in April, challenging the property rights that BGE claims. That resolution also passed unanimously.

The Harford County Council will review a similar measure on Tuesday evening.

The BSRM Project's estimated cost has doubled since it was announced last year, No More Power Lines said.

Seventeen property owners petitioned to intervene. Seven were granted formal status to present evidence of their easements and make an oral argument before the Public Service Commission.

"At the core of their case is the language of the original 1931 deeds, which grant BGE rights for 'an electrical transmission line' — singular, not plural," No More Power Lines said. "Landowners argue that constructing an additional line would exceed the scope of the original easements, constituting an unlawful expansion of rights and a trespass if approved."

Patch contacted BGE for a comment. The utility company is working on a response. We will update this story when it replies.

Related:

• Piedmont Power Line Developer Wants Regulators To Move More Quickly Than Planned
• Review For Piedmont Power Line Will Take Until At Least February 2027, Maryland Regulators Say
• Piedmont Power Line Company Files A Second Lawsuit Against Defiant Landowners
• Maryland Landowners Appeal Ruling That Allows Surveys For Piedmont Power Line
• Federal Judge Grants Piedmont Power Line Company Access To Land For Surveys
• Controversial Power Line Project Opposed By Baltimore County Executive