ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Governor Moore has signed House Bill 1532 — Utility RELIEF (Reducing Energy Load Inflation for Everyday Families) Act into law today, providing limited relief to Maryland ratepayers while advancing critical protections for property owners impacted by large-scale energy infrastructure projects.

Several Republican-led amendments aimed at delivering broader, long-term cost savings for Maryland families were ultimately rejected, including:

• Ending the EmPOWER Maryland Program;
• Adjusting Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards; and
• Withdrawing from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

Senator J.B. Jennings successfully secured an amendment to the Utility RELIEF Act, strengthening transparency and notification requirements for landowners impacted by major transmission line projects. The amendment incorporates key language from his bill, Senate Bill 584 — Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Transmission Lines — Notice to Landowners, introduced during the 2026 legislative session in response to concerns surrounding the Brandon Shores Retirement Mitigation Project (PSC Case #9748). Senate Bill 584 requires clear, direct and documented notice to affected and adjacent property owners, including formal notice of their right to intervene in Public Service Commission proceedings, and received favorable testimony from Protect Our Streams, The Valleys Planning Council and the Maryland Farm Bureau.

Harford County Executive Bob Cassilly wrote in support of the measure, saying, “This legislation does not prevent necessary projects from moving forward; it simply ensures that affected citizens are properly notified and afforded due process.”

Joanne Frederick, leader of Stop MPRP, also testified in support of the bill, stating, “Maryland property owners should not have to rely on rumor or last-minute meetings to learn that their land is under consideration for a transmission corridor.”

Although SB584 received a strong hearing before the Senate Energy, Education and the Environment Committee, it was never brought forward for a final vote.

Supporters of the Jennings amendment pointed to major inconsistencies in how utilities interpreted Maryland’s existing notification laws. While developers of the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project directly informed landowners and local governments of their rights to intervene, BGE relied primarily on a legal advertisement, website posting and social media notice for the Brandon Shores project.

“When this bill didn’t leave committee, I knew that we had to throw a Hail Mary and amend the Utility RELIEF Act to meet the needs of Marylanders like my constituents, who are struggling to navigate an unclear process,” said Senator Jennings.

When facing pushback on the Senate floor, regarding the inconvenience the amendment would cause for utility companies, Jennings said, “It’s somebody’s family’s home, where they raised their children. And to sit there and say to them, ‘I’m sorry you didn’t get notified, tough luck,’ That’s why we are down here, to fight for our constituents… This amendment can fix that, to make sure they’re notified properly and it’s done the right way. It’s simple. I’m disappointed that this is the attitude we are going to take, when I try to fight for my constituency.”

As he fought for the amendment, he warned, “They’re going to be calling each and every one of us, saying I wasn’t notified, they’re taking our family farm and taking my home,” emphasizing that the measure would address a problem many lawmakers will otherwise be forced to confront.

“The statute, as previously written, was too ambiguous and allowed utilities to decide how much, or how little, notice to provide,” Senator Jennings said. “Maryland families deserve a fair and transparent process regardless of which utility is involved.”

The signing of the Utility RELIEF Act comes as Senator Jennings, and several regional lawmakers continue to challenge the Brandon Shores Retirement Mitigation Project before the Public Service Commission. On April 9, 2026, Senator Jennings joined Senators Chris West, Johnny Ray Salling and Mary-Dulany James in filing an appeal. He later submitted a detailed Memorandum of Appeal on April 19, 2026, outlining constituent concerns, alleged deficiencies in the CPCN process and evidence suggesting the proposed transmission infrastructure may extend beyond immediate reliability need.

Among the concerns raised was a 2014 rendering mailed to landowners depicting a second transmission line designated for “future capacity,” raising additional questions about the long-term scope and purpose of the project. During evidentiary hearings last October, a Public Utility Law Judge cited Senator Jennings’ earlier letter challenging the redaction of project files and acknowledged the validity of transparency concerns raised by affected communities. In that letter, Senator Jennings wrote, “My constituents deserve transparency and assurance that there is a genuine and immediate reliability crisis, not that this infrastructure is being justified by speculative, future commercial needs.”

An independent report prepared for the Power Plant Research Program similarly concluded the project could create transmission capacity exceeding identified reliability needs.

The Public Service Commission is now expected to issue a final order in Case #9748 in the coming months.

Related