[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6644901,"mediaKeyId","3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733","parentId",3847976,"title","PSC to consider new proceeding, possible audit after staff finds inspection irregularities in BG&E multi‑year review","audioSeconds",545,"startMs",7688000,"endMs",8233000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733&start=7688&end=8233","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733/thumbnail_7688000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6644901/Maryland/PSC-to-consider-new-proceeding-possible-audit-after-staff-finds-inspection-irregularities-in-BGE-multiyear-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6644901-91217779f8e8acaf61dde01bbd0864c9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770625106&Signature=Nijf5vzFChOaND2fnGN9vKuSsPBTQ35DL4j2~gJaR5qS~33b1giKr7AwxlkYFyGCuEc0tk-SwY1lVqTiQFg2iwe5qaJPCOWhFvl5F7ikEgH1amyxEH8yWW~GsUhriwTeySneLequT-8aHUane-mq4SpPCsSqkh25VFiOC75txXKrepJMO39PdgQGNJHo0APn7B0s4-Cyrr-B~yKi8SXzCRyQ8ZT12q7yF8aw9dZcSgXrWhomxcKsT5MQ5bijIgEncyzIg4IrpOoPa43pfa7bJuCJDs6WDKDmVIuglz9KKs-ynO5f4Qwg8EFTY5GqQj910ZZlsGyInGsS9yLNcpw4Zg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Public Service Commission, MD","date","2025-05-18T12:35:38.973Z","article","Commission staff on April 23 presented an engineering-division report that identified concerns about inspections and supervisory oversight connected to Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.’s (BG&E) gas system programs. The Public Service Commission indicated it will issue an order to determine whether to open a separate docket and whether to commission an independent audit; parties took differing positions on scope and necessity.

What staff reported
John Clemenson, deputy chief engineer with the commission engineering division, explained staff’s recommended immediate action and presented a corrected wording for one recommendation: staff asked the commission to direct BG&E to produce a list of all projects that were assigned to, but not inspected by, a now-terminated employee and that were inspected by other inspectors under the Corrosion, Leak, Proactive Service Renewal program for 2022 until that employee’s termination. Staff said the independent review would determine whether the matter was localized to the one employee or indicative of broader, systemic oversight issues.

Company and OPC positions
BG&E representatives said the conduct in question involved a former employee and related to contract-compliance field audits rather than system-safety inspections. BG&E counsel said the company discovered the matter through internal review, removed the employee, and has enhanced oversight and tracking processes. BG&E argued an external audit could be an undue use of resources where staff’s report had not demonstrated a system-safety impact.

The Office of People's Counsel urged a separate docket and said material issues of fact in the engineering report warranted evidentiary proceedings. OPC also said a third‑party audit could provide an independent, fresh review to determine whether the problem was localized or systemic and whether customer costs were properly recorded.

Commission direction and next steps
Commission staff recommended that, because the investigation’s scope differs from the ongoing BG&E multi‑year rate case, the matter be docketed as a separate proceeding to allow parties to intervene and be heard. Commissioners indicated they would issue an order deciding whether to open a new docket and whether to authorize an independent audit. The chair said the order would address both docketing and the need for any external audit.

Context and clarifications
- Staff noted some recommendations to obtain lists of projects and to assess whether the employee’s work was performed by others and whether documentation and billing conform to contract and program rules.
- BG&E said the employee’s compensation was excluded from any recovery as an abundance of caution and emphasized the company’s layered safety and monitoring programs.

Ending: The commission will issue an order either opening a new docket for a targeted investigation or continuing the matter in the existing case and will decide whether an independent audit is warranted before proceeding further.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Administrative Meeting - 4/23/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Staff engineering investigators reported inspection and oversight irregularities connected to BG&E’s gas system program; the PSC will decide whether to open a separate docket and whether to order an independent audit.","taxTitle","Public Service Commission, Independent Agencies, Organizations, Executive, Maryland","taxId",80344,"location","Maryland","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6644916,"PSC takes BGE tariff filing under advisement amid sharp debate over PJM auction costs",3021,2149000,5170000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733&start=2149&end=5170","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733/thumbnail_2149000.jpg","/articles/6644916/Maryland/PSC-takes-BGE-tariff-filing-under-advisement-amid-sharp-debate-over-PJM-auction-costs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6644916-288f73e25ba2cd262fd948b6b7c3cacf/orig.mp4?Expires=1770625106&Signature=Rh9MJSxEt2sFG5hf1OICWyrZH7F8AviDlLqTb2y~JQujINTTzJ8DqFpF3jjwLfvxB70pC4U7H4c2eXVcdNzo2kdCtxFeZ8-bfVBitKHjyX8k-hGaU8NrseGCOnZQbyPKIbhXI0lP9g4PeuUH0kkts~Kvxl4xWMnEdmFnyjtkFd75DScJHx4n6q4XTcIoNzXeY6hJr2lmtnCFhO2CmU2Vr64CrhSOgqPngn3kl1D33lQM-ShKslxePPYqA7dCo2dTGqNj2GjDzJVT6MUH19zeSvwl3SfQ77avbhKwl3zH~FFkfFt-XRiz5n8m~zy16ex~inXiq-mJaH0DrXGwDoYSkg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.'s (BGE) April filing to adjust standard-offer service (SOS) residential rates to reflect higher-than-expected PJM capacity auction clearing prices was the subject of a lengthy April 23 discussion at the Maryland Public Service Commission. Staff recommended accepting proposed tariff revisions with a June 1 effective date; the commission took the matter under advisement to weigh competing risks and pending federal challenges.

Staff presentation and proposal
Eric Delgado of commission staff told commissioners that BGE proposed adjusting SOS rates to reflect actual capacity costs from PJM’s third incremental auction for the 2025–2026 delivery year. Staff said the PJM final clearing price for BGE’s zone was $306.84 per megawatt-day — significantly above the proxy price used when suppliers bid for SOS — and that the difference would otherwise be recovered via BGE’s Rider 8 energy-cost true-up beginning in October. Staff argued adopting the tariff change with a June 1 effective date would allow the cost to be spread over 12 months rather than eight, reducing the immediate monthly impact for customers. Staff estimated a residential customer using 1,000 kWh could see an increase of about $15.84 per month if the costs were recovered through the energy-cost adjustment instead of the proposed tariff timing.

Concerns from commissioners and advocates
Commissioner Richard and several colleagues criticized PJM’s auction process and raised the possibility that the auction result was flawed. Commissioner Richard described the increase as “an unjust and unreasonable new cost on our ratepayers” and urged exploration of whether the entities that govern PJM should bear some responsibility. Multiple commissioners asked whether refusal to accept the tariff now would simply move the same charges to the October Rider 8 true-up — a scenario staff said would compress the recovery period and likely increase the monthly impact.

Michael Sammartino and Ryan Shue of the Office of People's Counsel (OPC) told the commission OPC had filed a complaint at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on April 14 asking for expedited treatment and that any FERC determination could affect whether ratepayers ultimately bear the cost. Sammartino noted that even with expedited proceedings, refunds (if ordered) would not be instantaneous.

BGE's position
BGE representatives (company spokesperson on record) said the filing did not change the underlying pass-through structure adopted five years earlier: suppliers bid using a capacity proxy and actual capacity costs are trued up later. BGE argued the present filing only changes the timing and method of the true-up (recovering the known difference earlier and spreading it over 12 months) and that doing so is more transparent to customers. BGE emphasized that if FERC later orders refunds, funds would flow back through established mechanisms such as Rider 8.

Why the commission deferred
Commissioners expressed competing priorities: lessen immediate rate shock by spreading costs over a longer period versus holding action until the outcome of FERC complaints and potential PJM governance changes are clearer. Staff warned that declining the filing outright could discourage future SOS bidders or drive higher bids because suppliers would bear added risk. After lengthy discussion, the chair said the commission would take the filing under advisement and return with guidance on whether and when to accept a tariff change.

Key specifics from the record
- PJM third incremental auction clearing price for BGE zone: $306.84 per megawatt-day (staff statement).
- Estimated bill impact in absence of staff’s timing proposal: residential 1,000 kWh customer could see roughly $15.84 per month increase (staff estimate).
- OPC filed a complaint with FERC on April 14 seeking expedited treatment and requested a FERC determination by May 31; staff and OPC said refunds (if any) could take longer to process.

Next steps: The PSC will consider the tariff filing further and indicate whether it will accept a tariff now or later after staff reviews competing factors (timing, customer outreach, potential FERC action and PJM governance changes).","The Maryland Public Service Commission on April 23 took under advisement a Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. proposal to change how it recovers unexpectedly large PJM capacity-auction costs for standard-offer service, after commissioners and advocates pressed for more information and raised concerns about rate shock and pending FERC action.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6644921,"Maryland PSC defers Agway Energy license cancellation after consumer advocate objects",957,1039000,1996000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733&start=1039&end=1996","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733/thumbnail_1039000.jpg","/articles/6644921/Maryland/Maryland-PSC-defers-Agway-Energy-license-cancellation-after-consumer-advocate-objects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6644921-7209bb987e5b8e881b2adf482eb86b62/orig.mp4?Expires=1770625106&Signature=XZMKQ1oFY3oX4eWPOztJ0UHK5LNm7MkxgyipuaKpJI6ZZ97mewfRf5aTObaNKW6USJ5fKH-A5kUecNGwpvsdujATg4MWmRjyP3IZTRpPIlShkwqfbNgGykSMJZziXUcLIlrV-UPVqng19QN6rla33UrKbu~SQXf7vFbnGpyeLSo6B9~~-uZw-9F5ua-gRTbOukM4gQdMkUeHQPwkfmUyI9UMcgAXP42sw2ps-G6aTlioT9yFXXccnYAXxdo0pfgu6RL2B1ONRntgb47PRhXd0nDXMmmmXn8cH-wgICoJ~6h1jv72KgsC9IMeamdnRfN-NSeFXm~gHJ1WECGtCZK49w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Maryland Public Service Commission on April 23 deferred action on a staff recommendation to approve Agway Energy Services LLC's request to cancel its electricity and gas supplier licenses after the Office of People's Counsel said the company should be required to maintain its licenses and bonds for three years to cover potential future complaints from former customers.

The commission had placed the item on the administrative consent agenda and the chair initially moved to approve the cancellation. Milan Tuck Mikhail of the Maryland Office of People's Counsel (OPC) told the commission that OPC “disagrees with staff's recommendation to approve Agway's request to relinquish its electric and gas supplier licenses” and recommended the commission require Agway to keep its licenses active and maintain all bonds “for at least the next 3 years to cover liabilities to its former customers.”

Staff had told the commission that Agway had been licensed since September 2017, that it currently reports no customers and that its current load and GATS registrations show no active service. Charles Herbert, appearing for staff, said historical EIA-861 data showed the company had residential customers in 2023–2024 but that “as of now, they have dropped all customers.” Herbert also said the company had two closed complaints (2019 and 2020) and no open complaints.

Why it matters: OPC urged the three-year requirement based on prior commission decisions in similar cases (Great American Power LLC and Tomorrow Energy Corporation) where the commission denied relinquishment because it wanted to preserve jurisdiction to address future complaints. OPC argued that requiring license and bond retention for three years preserves a source of recovery if former customers later bring timely complaints.

What the commission decided: After questions from commissioners about the number of customers (staff said fewer than 10 residential customers across electric and gas in the most recent years) and how long bonds remain in effect (staff said bonds would require 60 days' notice to cancel), the chair moved to reconsider the earlier approval and the commission voted to defer the item to a future meeting. The chair directed staff to prepare a proposed policy addressing license-cancellation requests by suppliers that have or recently had customers.

Discussion highlights and clarifications
- OPC's recommendation: Milan Tuck Mikhail (Office of People's Counsel) asked the commission to require Agway to maintain licenses and bonds for three years so the commission can access bonds if former customers file timely complaints. OPC cited recent precedents in which the commission refused to allow relinquishment without such protections.
- Staff's position: Charles Herbert (staff) said Agway currently has no load in PJM/GATS, had fewer than 10 residential customers in recent EIA-861 filings, and had two closed complaints (2019, 2020). Kevin Mosher (staff) noted that the company would have to provide 60 days' notice to cancel a bond if it chose to do so.
- Commissioners' concerns: Several commissioners said a bright-line policy (for example, a three-year period to retain license and bond after serving residential customers) would ease future decision-making and administrative burden. One commissioner said the three-year window aligns with the statute of limitations for some customer complaints.

Next steps: The commission deferred the item and asked staff to prepare a proposed policy for consideration at a future meeting that would set a clear process and timeline for handling supplier license-cancellation requests when former residential customers may still have claims.

Ending note: The company did not appear at the meeting; staff reported no responsive filing from Agway to OPC's comments as of the meeting.

","The Maryland Public Service Commission deferred a staff-recommended approval of Agway Energy Services LLC's request to cancel its electric and gas supplier licenses after the Office of People's Counsel urged the commission to require the company to maintain its licenses and bonds for three years to protect former customers.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6644906,"PSC notes Washington Gas STRIDE 2024 reconciliation; staff finds expenditures within approved budget",2976,3159000,6135000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733&start=3159&end=6135","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733/thumbnail_3159000.jpg","/articles/6644906/Maryland/PSC-notes-Washington-Gas-STRIDE-2024-reconciliation-staff-finds-expenditures-within-approved-budget","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6644906-b7ff4754f3da51df171ef3fa0f5daddf/orig.mp4?Expires=1770625106&Signature=HxjPbMn69~xO0XGA23GVKltR2~JTangZWGiGYUV9JAIGxz6HWyoYb8p~hCKWcrZWjVmQ3mri-~ibOhkb~B2eetTZIFXC7J7TGWQgiYuuKwN8O1C8eNVngZbqOXEpJCK9~2okD2n3DvN~YKK5oyb0TXcumS5H2dXMFfjF2zGKjV1thX-m6ZdhG5qcnerkWQM24hbPlKk~~ccy7CyEofJgqSZAIuLobkYby7fRxmCWgzkGmNAh9KXVNkP3F-Iv~qeEvOgKFuysMQeoXyXh3zIiR-ywdf-4kPIsEFwRGMB5LiB4fn11FOk3dc3j~~2xZzVeWJFYsQVfEjrXs~BJ2vnrhg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Maryland Public Service Commission on April 23 noted Washington Gas Light’s (WGL) calendar year 2024 STRIDE (Strategic Infrastructure Development and Enhancement) report and reconciliation, and accepted the company’s proposed 2025 surcharge factors derived from the 2024 reconciliation.

Staff findings and company performance
Staff representatives reported that, as of Dec. 31, 2024, Washington Gas remediated or replaced 1,477 services (the company’s plan had listed 1,297), installed 3.8 miles of mains (planned 3.7 miles) and retired 6.6 miles of mains (planned 6.5 miles). Staff said WGL spent approximately $53,100,000 on STRIDE projects in calendar year 2024, or about 102% of the company’s estimated $52,300,000 budget for the year. Staff reviewed the revenue-requirement calculations and concluded the total STRIDE investment expenditures were within the commission-approved budget.

The reconciliation and impact on customers
Staff reported Washington Gas over-collected $328,436 (including $29,985 of interest) for the 2024 STRIDE reconciliation — a decrease of $10,865 (3%) from the 2023 over-collection. Staff’s recalculation produced an actual revenue requirement for 2024 of $9,271,800 (total cost $9,301,785 less interest $29,985). Staff recommended the commission note the company’s filing and accept the computed reconciliation factors; the commission so ordered.

Questions and context
Commissioners asked whether staff performs a prudence review in the annual reconciliation (staff said that prudence review generally occurs in a subsequent rate case). Staff and company representatives said Washington Gas would file a rate case within the STRIDE plan period, at which time prudence and other issues would be examined in more detail. Staff urged that companies better align project lists to avoid removing projects outside original lists during the year.

Legislative changes
Commission staff and Washington Gas noted pending legislation (Senate Bill 937 at the time of the meeting) that could modify STRIDE requirements going forward. Staff said some statutory changes would not retroactively alter approved project lists but could require additional analyses in future filings.

Decision
The commission voted to note Washington Gas’s calendar year 2024 STRIDE annual report and reconciliation and to accept the resulting 2025 surcharge factors. The motion passed with recorded ayes from commissioners present.

","Staff told the Maryland Public Service Commission that Washington Gas completed or made progress on its STRIDE 3 infrastructure plan for 2024 and that reconciliation calculations are accurate; the commission noted the 2024 report and accepted 2025 surcharge factors.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":105,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6644911,"At-a-glance: PSC administrative meeting votes — April 23, 2025",4106,2029000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733&start=2029&end=6135","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3847976-2f951f9fb76b9dd180ed91a5c8501733/thumbnail_2029000.jpg","/articles/6644911/Maryland/At-a-glance-PSC-administrative-meeting-votes-April-23-2025","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6644911-8e622fb20af85b0941eaef2e0a0a55ca/orig.mp4?Expires=1770625106&Signature=LGtVLdlNwAHjeWUB9~v-3N19AslgRLjenRJdj0aCooQxBVyKhKt5lWWWx-XvWvS-6aQ4a81OqceMeGaXWHL0JnGe4SQmCbgLxKzUdldnwwwmLbu3t87jxjORjwl2e~BzNyxA7fxOE7fj2WCavubZBImvj2Yur3s0CZVPcSx1SZ7FVQWJqpDgtOgwLf0STC4C9GcaTvGHFVicj~iU4WvHfIZifknrMlz1zeV9qEsL9MDAGwmyLIi2TbNs3Dn26F-jZ8BXBNpAYboUzGCAgXinomF2eIKxGVd77TS0Sdj6eS6xwVVe2ARtD-jk2NtGtTDyRatQurNWgL7EiujoDOF1TQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Public Service Commission recorded the following formal actions during its April 23 administrative meeting. Short descriptions below reflect motions, recorded votes, and immediate outcomes as taken on the administrative record.

Votes at a glance
- Newmarket Solar LLC — Extension of project deadlines: The commission granted Newmarket Solar’s request to extend construction commencement to Oct. 27, 2026, and operation to Oct. 27, 2027. Motion carried (Commissioner Linton: aye; Commissioner Sussman: aye; Commissioner Barbay: aye; Commissioner Richard: aye).

- Arclic Inc. (operating authority cancellation) — The commission canceled Arclic Inc.’s authority to provide facilities-based local exchange and interexchange services in Maryland and canceled PSC Maryland Tariff No. 1, with the understanding that the company must file a new application if it seeks future authority to offer services under commission jurisdiction. Motion carried (unanimous recorded ayes).

- Baltimore Gas and Electric Company — Electric vehicle smart charge program tariff supplement (Supplement 731 to Rider 33): The commission accepted the supplement to modify enrollment and incentive rules for BGE’s residential EV smart charge management program, effective April 23, 2025. Motion carried (recorded ayes).

- Washington Gas Light — STRIDE 2024 annual report and reconciliation: The commission noted Washington Gas Light’s 2024 STRIDE annual report and reconciliation and accepted the 2025 surcharge factors based on the 2024 reconciliation. Motion carried (recorded ayes).

Items deferred or taken under advisement
- Agway Energy Services LLC — License cancellation request: Initially moved for approval but reconsidered; the commission deferred the item and directed staff to prepare a proposed policy for future consideration on supplier license cancellations and bond retention.

- Baltimore Gas & Electric Company — SOS tariff changes tied to PJM capacity auction results: Staff recommended accepting BGE’s proposed tariff revisions with a June 1 effective date; after extensive discussion the commission took the filing under advisement pending further analysis and consideration of pending FERC proceedings.

Supporting record: Each action above is recorded in the administrative meeting transcript; staff and counsel provided supporting presentations and recommendations for the commission.","Summary of formal actions recorded at the Maryland Public Service Commission administrative meeting on April 23, including approvals of operational-deadline extensions, tariff supplements, and cancellations of operating authority.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

PSC to consider new proceeding, possible audit after staff finds inspection irregularities in BG&E multi‑year review

PSC takes BGE tariff filing under advisement amid sharp debate over PJM auction costs

Maryland PSC defers Agway Energy license cancellation after consumer advocate objects

PSC notes Washington Gas STRIDE 2024 reconciliation; staff finds expenditures within approved budget

At-a-glance: PSC administrative meeting votes — April 23, 2025