Public Hearing on Utility Rates and Rate Making Amendment Act of 2026 - June 29, 2026

Chairperson Charles Allen (Ward 6) opened the hearing on Bill 26-596, the Utility Rates and Rate Making Amendment Act of 2026, at 9:45 a.m. on Monday, June 29, 2026. The hearing focused on public witnesses; government witnesses will testify on Thursday, July 2, 2026 at 1 p.m. Allen noted that utility costs have surged nearly 70% from 2017 to 2025, with one in six households nationwide behind on energy bills and average overdue balances near $800. The bill would require the Public Service Commission (PSC) to approve multi-year rate plans only if based on historic test years and without reconciliation, specify refunds for excess return on equity, and require gas infrastructure projects to demonstrate customer benefit and analysis of alternatives.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Claire Mills (CCAN Action Fund): Recommended the council provide explicit direction and deadlines to the PSC, require regular audits of utility rate bases, and prohibit frivolous costs like lobbying. She expressed concern that the bill's cost-benefit analysis requirement is insufficient without a comprehensive framework.
• Macy Brigham Hill (CCAN): Emphasized that clean energy is affordable energy, urging fast-tracking local solar and battery storage to reduce reliance on PJM generation costs. She noted average electricity bills rose nearly 67% between March 2021 and March 2026.
• Laura Levinson (Sierra Club DC): Opposed the bill as insufficient, arguing it does not rein in utility spending or meet climate commitments. She called for limiting gas infrastructure projects to leak detection and repair, and criticized the mayor for diverting $80 million from the Sustainable Energy Trust Fund.
• Anne DeBuys (public witness): Urged the committee to table the bill, stating the cost-benefit analysis language is premature because the PSC has not yet developed a holistic narrative framework for evaluating distributed energy resources.
• Bethany Costello (WePower DC): Supported the bill but recommended revisions to prevent utilities from subverting its intent. She advocated for public power, transparency measures (e.g., monthly profit reports, audits), and a cooling-off period for PSC staff.
• Sailor Goodson Bell (Solar United Neighbors): Urged maintaining and expanding local solar incentives, noting that 64% of low-income families are energy burdened and that solar has saved over $80 million for 11,000 families through Solar for All.
• Robin Dutta (Chesapeake Solar and Storage Association): Supported the bill, emphasizing the need to maximize local generation and load flexibility. He noted that PJM does not count front-of-meter solar as load modifiers, artificially increasing capacity costs.
• Nicole Rentz (New Columbia Solar): Recommended adopting the Grid Act, enabling energy storage and virtual power plants, and expanding Solar for All. She stated solar now meets about 5% of DC's electricity demand, avoiding roughly $90 million in costs this year.
• Jennifer Spinocsi (Clean Choice Energy): Opposed subtitle E of the Budget Support Act (BSA), arguing price caps would eliminate customer choice, as happened in Maryland. She supported targeted consumer protections instead.
• Mason Emnett (Constellation Energy): Opposed subtitle E, stating it would reduce innovation and drive suppliers out of the market. He urged the council to remove it and consider balanced consumer protections.
• Kimberly Manning (TBA): Urged caution on the bill, warning that restrictions on multi-year rate plans could harm local contractors and CBEs that rely on predictable project pipelines from utilities like Pepco.
• Janique Williams (WGL Energy): Opposed subtitle E, calling it market reform rather than consumer protection. She objected to the 110% price cap, noting that suppliers procure energy in real time versus utilities' staggered approach.
• Rob Lemming (Pepco): Defended multi-year rate plans as providing predictability and transparency. He argued that most bill increases come from supply costs outside Pepco's control, and that the bill's historic cost requirements could underfund critical investments.
• Amber Perry (Pepco): Highlighted that distribution costs account for only about 25% of a customer's bill, while supply costs (60%) are driven by PJM capacity prices that have increased from $29 to over $330 per megawatt-day. She supported expanding energy efficiency and virtual power plants.
• Nikia Crossley (Washington Gas): Opposed the bill's requirement for positive net benefits on safety investments, arguing that risk reduction from replacing aging cast iron pipes is difficult to quantify. She noted the PSC already has authority to balance affordability and safety.
• Cynthia Quarterman (former PHMSA administrator): Emphasized the safety imperative of replacing vintage cast iron and bare steel pipes, noting DC has the largest percentage of pre-1940 cast iron pipe (31%) of any state. She urged the committee not to slow replacement efforts.
• Pat Garofalo (American Economic Liberties Project): Recommended lowering authorized return on equity (Pepco requested 10.5%) and prohibiting ratepayer-funded lobbying. He cited research that excessive returns cost ratepayers $50 billion annually nationwide.
• Keith Fox (Fox STEM): Supported multi-year rate plans, stating they provide the predictability needed for local contractors to plan and invest.
• Christy Wallaca (NUCA DC): Opposed additional regulatory hurdles, arguing they would delay critical infrastructure projects and harm local contractors.
• Rosalind Stiles (NAMC DC): Supported Pepco's multi-year plans, noting they have created jobs for minority contractors and that 43% of Pepco's spending on Capital Grid went to small and local businesses.
• Kevin Carey and Fran Francis (AOBA): Supported the bill and urged the council to sunset multi-year rate plans, return to historic test year rate making, and require cost-benefit analysis for major investments. They also asked the council to urge the PSC to roll back rates to pre-January 2025 levels following a court remand.
• Frank Khaliva (RESA): Opposed subtitle E, stating price caps would eliminate residential energy choice, as occurred in Maryland where all 274 suppliers ceased residential operations. He offered alternative consumer protection proposals.
• Adrian Mouton Henderson (Constellation Energy): Opposed subtitle E, arguing it would reduce competition and eliminate clean energy choices. She urged a transparent legislative process.
• Ann Walters (public witness): Opposed the bill, stating it would delay critical grid upgrades like the Capital Grid project in Ward 4. She supported expanding targeted assistance programs.
• Daniel Greenberg (public witness): Raised concerns about utilities discriminating against customers who pay by credit card for auto-pay, and charging fees that vary by jurisdiction.
• Jerry Willford (IBEW Local 1900): Opposed the bill, warning it would delay infrastructure projects and harm union jobs. He noted Pepco's partnership with DC Infrastructure Academy has employed over 110 graduates since 2018.
• Dusty Harbaugh (CW & Sons Infrastructure): Opposed the bill, stating multi-year rate plans provide the financial stability needed for long-term projects like the Capital Grid. He warned that delays could threaten jobs and grid reliability.
• Benjamin Morad (WePower DC): Supported the bill and recommended funding dedicated staff for public officials to intervene in PSC proceedings, citing examples from other states where commissioners faced political pressure.
• Phil Campbell (solar owner): Supported maintaining solar incentives, noting his Solar for All system saves him over $100 per month and provides SREC income.
• Wilma Mason (Salvation Army): Highlighted the Pepco Customer Service Fund, which distributed $3.25 million to over 9,000 households in the past year. She urged continued investment in affordability programs.
• Frank Coles (public witness): Raised issues with Pepco disconnecting his solar monitoring system and charging fees to access usage data, making it difficult to track savings.
• Delaney Brown (Power for Tomorrow): Discussed that multi-year rate plans have limited impact on supply costs driven by PJM, which saw capacity prices rise over 800%. She noted that customers in deregulated states like DC pay significantly more than those in regulated states.

Discussion Items

• The committee heard extensive debate on the merits of multi-year rate plans, with supporters (Pepco, contractors, unions) arguing they provide predictability and transparency, while opponents (AOBA, some advocates) argued they shift risk to ratepayers and enable excessive spending.
• Subtitle E of the BSA was a major topic: suppliers and trade associations opposed price caps, while consumer advocates supported protections against predatory practices. Several witnesses urged the council to remove subtitle E and consider it through standalone legislation.
• The role of PJM in driving supply costs was repeatedly highlighted, with many witnesses calling for more local solar and storage to reduce reliance on the regional grid.
• Safety of aging gas infrastructure was discussed, with Washington Gas and Cynthia Quarterman emphasizing the need for proactive replacement of cast iron pipes, while some advocates questioned the cost-effectiveness of continued gas investments given climate goals.
• Several witnesses raised concerns about the PSC's working group process and the need for stronger oversight and transparency.

Key Outcomes

• No votes were taken; the hearing was solely for public witness testimony.
• The record will remain open until July 16, 2026, for written testimony via the council's hearing management system.
• The committee will reconvene on Thursday, July 2, 2026 at 1 p.m. to hear government witness testimony on Bill 26-596 and related policy solutions.