The Public Service Commission of Maryland heard testimony Oct. 20, 2025, recommending acceptance of the initial results from the 2025–26 Standard Offer Service (SOS) request-for-proposals process and presenting estimates that average residential electric bills will increase across the state.

Frank Mossberg, the monitoring technical consultant at Bates White LLC, testified that staff “would recommend that you accept the results of this past Monday's bid.” Mossberg told the commission the first of four bid days produced a competitive outcome, with 15 bidders offering roughly 5.6 megawatts for every megawatt needed and eight winning bids. He said the process was “open, fair, and transparent” and that bid prices were consistent with broader market conditions.

Drew McAuliffe, director of the commission staff's electricity division, summarized the staff report on estimated bill impacts. He presented utility-by-utility projections comparing June 2025–May 2026 to June 2026–May 2027 for residential customers. McAuliffe said average total residential bills will rise for each utility: Potomac Edison by 3.1 percent (about $61 per year), Potomac Electric Power Company (Pepco) by 4.8 percent (about $122 per year), Delmarva Power and Light by 3.5 percent (about $88 per year), and Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. (BGE) by 3.4 percent (about $75 per year). He also reported larger seasonal increases for winter period rates: Potomac Edison winter bills up roughly 13–15 percent year over year and SOS rates rising about 21 percent from fall to winter; BGE winter bills up about 22–25 percent with SOS up 20–22 percent from fall to winter; Delmarva winter bills up 3–6 percent with SOS up 28–37 percent from fall to winter; and Pepco winter bills up 24–28 percent with SOS up about 22 percent from fall to winter.

Mossberg and McAuliffe both attributed some of the upward pressure on prices to higher capacity costs in the PJM interconnection's capacity market. Mossberg said, without giving proprietary bid-level details, that “prices were up, as compared to April, mainly due to increases in the price of capacity in the PJM capacity market.” He also noted no winning bids were rejected under the RFP’s price anomaly threshold (PAT).

Staff marked Mossberg’s direct testimony as staff exhibit 1 and the staff report summarizing the bidding results and estimated bill impacts as staff exhibit 2; both exhibits were admitted into the evidentiary record. Chair Hoover and commissioners had no substantive additional questions during the hearing beyond a short exchange exploring whether the number of customers remaining on SOS has changed and what that trend might mean for future procurements. McAuliffe said he has not yet reviewed detailed shopping trends by block size but acknowledged the commission’s monthly reports show fewer customers are shopping and that utilities “would have to procure more, possibly,” if that trend continues.

The staff presented the results as the first of four bid days in the RFP process; Mossberg recommended the commission accept these results and proceed. No formal vote on final procurement strategy or rate adjustments was recorded during the session; the hearing admitted testimony and evidence into the record and concluded with staff available for follow-up questions.

The commission’s acceptance of staff recommendations and the admitted exhibits formalize the record for subsequent deliberations and for future bid days in the 2025–26 SOS RFP. The staff report and Mossberg’s testimony will underpin further review and any regulatory actions the commission may take regarding SOS supplier selections and the timing of rate-setting for the coming service year.