Controversial legislation is moving through the Maryland General Assembly to okay building overhead transmission lines in three wildland areas to power several states and may jeopardize 28 endangered species and millions in federal funds for wildlife protection.
A pair of mirror proposed laws House Bill 1270 and Senate Bill 399 are passing various legislative stages in both chambers despite overwhelming local opposition. The legislation seeks to construct part of a large-scale, 105-mile, 500 kilovolt transmission line from Virginia to Pennsylvania through three untouched and protected Maryland wildlands.
The legislation is called “Natural Resources – Wildland Areas – Overhead Transmission Lines.” HB 1270 is sponsored by Delegate Jim Hinebaugh Jr., a retired U.S. Army colonel, while SB 399 is spearheaded by Sen. Mike McKay, a business owner.
Many opponents to the legislation have submitted testimony about a lack of public hearings and participation prior to the bills being introduced in the General Assembly.
The bills seek to exempt parts of three protected areas in the Big Savage Mountain Wildland, Bear Pen Wildland and Dan’s Mountain Wildland from being designated as a wildland area and instead be given approval to build the transmission line. The bills would mandate the state Public Service Commission to require the project company (NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic Inc.) to obtain “a certificate of public convenience and necessity” to build the overhead transmission line and “provide wildland impact mitigation guarantees.”
Currently Protected, Untouched Lands and Forests
At issue are the protected lands and the species that live there which would be forever disrupted in Maryland for a project that would also provide electricity to consumers in other states and as corporate financial benefits.
The state has been protecting the three areas—Big Savage Mountain Wildland (2,879 acres), Bear Pen Wildland (1,517 acres) and Dan’s Mountain Wildland (4,047 acres)—as its highest classification of wildlands. These are defined as primitive areas untouched by urban civilization that “can offer the experience of solitude and self-reliance. These wildlands are usually lands located at higher elevations that protect watersheds and are ecologically vulnerable to human interferences,” according to a Maryland General Assembly 2025 Fiscal Policy Note about the impact of HB 1270.
The fiscal policy note underscored that commercial enterprises and permanent roads, operating motorized equipment/vehicles and installed structures are prohibited in the wildland areas.
If approved, construction of the overhead transmission lines could disallow Pittman-Robertson Act federal funding, of which Maryland received $9.2 million in fiscal year 2024.
The protected wildlands also provide a habitat for two endangered bat species, a rare Appalachian cottontail rabbit and 25 other known rare, threatened, or endangered species.
Mixed Support: 21 Backers
Supporting the legislation were 14 testimonies, including one from T.R. Robinette, president of the Allegany County Farm Bureau Inc.: “After the transmission is completed that habitat which is currently wildland will go back to wildland habitat. To go around the wildlands would take more personal property including farmland and residential areas.”
Another proponent was Billy Bishoff of the Garrett County Farm Bureau. “Our reasoning is that our agricultural lands are equally important as wildlands. We are not advocating for the construction of a transmission line. We just believe that if it is built that it should follow a path that minimizes the impact on all lands. Our concern is that efforts to avoid wildlands will impact more of our land.”
Also representing other agriculture interests was Tyler Hough, government relations director of Maryland Farm Bureau, who submitted support for the legislation as having less of an impact to farms. However, Hough stressed “Maryland Farm Bureau’s support of HB1270 is in no way in support of the construction of the NextEra Energy proposed transmission line through Garrett and Allegany County.”
Lobbyist Jamie DeMarco, representing the Chesapeake Climate Action Network Action Fund, encouraged passage of the legislation and noted that NextEra has the project contract. “When compared to other potential alternative transmission routes the proposed Wildlands route would have less impacts to residents, farms, and businesses. In addition, the Wildlands route would affect less forest clearing, wetlands, and trout streams. It would also cost less for Marylanders as it is a much shorter route,” DeMarco stated in written testimony.
In the Senate, there seven testimonies submitted in favor of the SB 399, including a letter from NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic, which is developing the MidAtlantic Resiliency Link (MARL) transmission line. The entire project would build a new 105-mile, 500 kilovolt transmission line from Fredrick County, Va., to Greene County, Penn. And contain a Maryland section at the potential wildlands site in Allegany and Garrett counties.
Kaley Bangston, NextEra Energy regulatory and political affairs director, submitted written testimony backing the bill. She said it would exempt “a small portion of land to allow for the MARL line to route adjacent to an existing transmission line owned and operated by FirstEnergy which also routes through Wildlands. While we believe this routing option provides the least impact to the region, we are actively performing a routing study and taking feedback from local stakeholders as we make these routing decisions.”
Massive Opposition: 76 Unfavorable Testimonies
Kurt R. Schwarz, conservation chair emeritus of the Maryland Ornithological Society, urged legislators in written testimony against passing the legislation since building the electric transmission lines there would “destroy these ecosystems, habitats, or rare plants. ..Our members visit these Wildlands to admire the birds that live there. Big Savage Mountain, Bear Pen, and Dan’s Mountain Wildlands all provide valuable habitat for our declining bird populations. North America has lost almost 30% of its birds since 1970. Loss of habitat is one on the major causes of these declines.”
Schwarz explained many reasons why the Maryland Ornithological Society is strongly against passage of the legislation. He predicted placing the overhead transmission lines will fragment the unbroken forests in these wildlands for already declining bird species populations that live inside forest interiors. “Trees are felled along the line, and vegetation below the lines is permanently suppressed. Support roads destroy and fragment additional forest,” he noted. Also the forests are vital for the other creatures living there—native brook trout and a rare mammal called a fisher, which is related to weasels and otters.
“The proposed transmission line corridor through Western Maryland is part of a larger project to meet the exclusive demands of data centers in Northern Virginia,” Garrett County Forestry Board Chair Will Williams stated in testimony. The board promotes stewardship of Maryland forests. “There is no map of the exempted transmission line routes being proposed by the bill. There has been no determination that these high-voltage electric lines will serve the interests of the State and its people when there are other forms of energy to be considered that are less intrusive,” Williams added.
Brent Walls, riverkeeper at the Potomac Riverkeeper Network, subjected a two-page letter objecting to the legislation that would enable NextEra to “cut a 200 foot path through” Maryland wildlands, “fracturing the vitality.” Furthermore, passage of the legislation would “undermine the integrity of legislation that has been in place for 52 years and set a precedent that any for profit company can legislate a taking of Wildlands.”
Another opponent was Dawn Beitzel, from Engage Mountain Maryland, who echoed concern about the infrastructure project causing “irreversible impacts on wildlife habitats, water quality, and the natural beauty that defines these areas” as well as disrupting migrating species, forever changing landscapes and introducing invasive species. “Additionally, there are alternative routes and technologies available to deliver necessary energy infrastructure without compromising protected wildlands. Advancing such options would align with Maryland’s commitment to conservation and sustainability while still meeting the state’s energy needs,” Beitzel added.
Opposing the Senate bill was Emily Tarsell, president of Health Choice Maryland: “Our protected wild lands are protected for a reason. Invasions into these publicly held lands would set a bad precedent for the ability of public-private partnerships to engage in land grabs. The public would lose access to these protected sites while gaining nothing. Development of wild lands would be costly for electric consumers and a gift to private developers and corporate data centers.”
David Mosher, of the Maryland chapter of Sierra Club, submitted detailed testimony outlining a series of negative outcomes if enacted. His contentions included the following: “Our Wild Lands are a significant source of revenue to the State. Wildlife are critical to Maryland’s tourism industry. Wildlife watching in Maryland generates over $450 million in economic activity annually in the State each year. This proposal could lead to revenue losses to local businesses and municipalities of millions of dollars.”
Legislation So Far Not Encountering Hurdles
As of March 26, the bills continued to move through and gain steam as they winded through both chambers. HB1270 was in its 3rd reading. The Senate version (SB 399) had sailed through to the 1st reading in the opposite chamber.
If passed by the legislature and enacted by Gov. Wes Moore, either bill would become law Oct. 1.
