Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Residents, students and climate groups urge PSC to reject Washington Gas plan and lead integrated energy planning
Loading...
Summary
More than a dozen witnesses at the Business and Economic Development oversight hearing called on the Public Service Commission to reject the Washington Gas 'District Safe' proposal (a refile of Project Pipes), require integrated gas/electric planning, and push Pepco to meet renewable procurement goals.
A broad coalition of residents, students and climate organizations told the Committee on Business and Economic Development that the District’s Public Service Commission (PSC) should reject Washington Gas’ latest infrastructure proposal — known in filings as “District Safe” — and should adopt more aggressive integrated planning, stronger data access and clearer renewables mandates for Pepco.
Mark Rodefer of the Sierra Club and other witnesses said the PSC’s recent decisions have favored the utilities and called for more assertive regulation. Rodefer summarized a recent dissent at the PSC, saying the dissenting commissioner characterized the majority’s approach to a Pepco rate increase as, in his words, “because Pepco said so.”
The nut graf: Witnesses asked the PSC to refuse to approve expensive, long-term methane-infrastructure bailouts that lock the city into fossil fuel use, to compel utilities to provide planning data and to adopt firm renewable procurement targets for Pepco.
Several witnesses recounted methane leaks and safety concerns while citing large numbers: public testimony cited more than 1,000 hazardous leaks reported in 2023 and that 87% of reported leaks for a year were “hazardous” according to PSC leak data presented by witnesses. Many witnesses urged the commission to favor targeted repairs and electrification over a multibillion-dollar accelerated pipe replacement program that they say would saddle ratepayers with future stranded costs.
Student witnesses and climate groups urged more aggressive renewables procurement by Pepco. Several speakers called for expanding Pepco’s renewable power purchase agreement requirement beyond the current 5% and for penalties for noncompliance. Testimony also asked the committee to press the PSC for more transparent public engagement: witnesses said the PSC has not held sufficient public-facing forums where commissioners respond in person to community concerns.
Ending: The committee heard detailed testimony urging the PSC to: (1) reject or substantially rework the District Safe/Project Pipes proposal; (2) require integrated gas–electric distribution planning with public data access; and (3) adopt stronger renewables procurement targets and enforceable requirements for Pepco. The PSC will address these matters in its docketed proceedings; the council will continue oversight and invited the PSC to respond formally in its scheduled appearance.
