Public Service Commission accepts unanimous settlement in Maryland American Water rate case, admits exhibits
Loading...
Summary
At a virtual evidentiary hearing, the Public Service Commission accepted a unanimous settlement in Case 9808 involving Maryland American Water Company, admitted parties’ exhibits into the record, and asked the company to provide follow-up data in writing about customer impacts and tax refunds.
The Public Service Commission accepted a unanimous settlement in Case 9808 and admitted related exhibits into the record at a virtual evidentiary hearing, Chair Kumar Barve said. Parties waived witness appearances and instead presented and had a set of submitted exhibits admitted.
The settlement agreement — filed as a joint stipulation on 02/22/2026 and described by counsel as a 94-page document — was offered to the record along with company, Office of People’s Council (OPC), and commission staff exhibits. Company counsel David Duvelmans told the commission he would enumerate company exhibits and then move them into evidence; the commission admitted company exhibits 2 through 25, OPC exhibits 1 through 10, and staff exhibits 1 through 9 without objection.
Why it matters: The proceeding concerns a rate-case settlement involving Maryland American Water Company and includes filing materials and testimony the commission will consider when issuing its final order. Commissioners asked for follow-up information that could affect the assessment of customer bill impacts.
Company counsel summarized the exhibits and asked for their admission, saying, “I would request to mark the joint stipulation settlement agreement of this case,” and later asking to move company exhibits 2 through 25 into evidence. When a commissioner asked for the total amount customers would be asked to pay in the second-year regulatory asset phase and how a refund of excess accumulated deferred income taxes (ADIT) would affect bill impacts, Duvelmans said he did not have the totals on hand but offered, “I could probably get that to you in response to a bench data request, your honor.”
Commissioner questioning also touched on a separate tariff the company filed in September to distribute PFAS settlement proceeds. Commissioner Lancer sought confirmation that positions the parties presented earlier about that tariff remain unchanged. Duvelmans said on behalf of the company, “our position with respect to that tariff has not changed.” OPC counsel Brock Miller and commission staff confirmed their positions likewise had not changed.
The hearing concluded with Chair Kumar Barve saying the commission will publish an order shortly; the proceeding went off the record at 1:21 p.m.
The record now contains the joint stipulation and the parties’ submitted exhibits; the commission indicated it will rely on those filings, the settlement testimony and any follow-up bench data responses when preparing its written order.
