The Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) will hold three public comment hearings on the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company’s (BGE) application to adjust its electric base rates (Case No. 9888).
The public hearings will take place at 6:30 p.m. on each of the following dates: Monday, Oct. 26, Wednesday, Nov. 4, and Wednesday, Nov. 18. The first two will be virtual, and the last (Nov. 18) will be in-person at the following location:
Frank O. Heintz Hearing Room
William Donald Schaefer Tower
6 St. Paul Street, 16th Floor
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
The PSC regulates electric and gas utilities and suppliers, landline phone companies, private water and sewer companies, and more. Last week, it released a “Lessons Learned” document, results of its analysis of the state’s multi-year rate plan (MRP) pilot program.
The Commission created the MRP pilot program in February 2020. BGE served as the pilot utility, and later Potomac Electric Power Company and Delmarva Power & Light Company were also approved for multi-year plans.
The MRP pilot program allowed utilities like BGE to set rates based on projected costs and spending rather than historical costs. For example, BGE might look ahead several years at what it predicts it will need to spend on infrastructure, and raise rates incrementally based on those projections. The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel pointed out in 2023 that MRPs “allow utilities to charge customers for the costs of projects before those projects are used to serve customers.” A traditional rate-making plan, by contrast, would require utilities to finish work and show what its costs were before they were permitted to increase customers’ rates to recover the costs.
The commission found that while there were some benefits to the forward-looking MRP rate-setting approach for utility companies, there were no “clear, measurable benefits for ratepayers.” As the pilot was implemented, the commission said it “increased the complexity, time, and resources required for rate proceedings … [and] did not make customer rates more predictable or stable than traditional historic-test-year ratemaking, did not demonstrably advance Maryland’s energy policy goals, and did not produce greater utility innovation.”
The PSC concluded that the MRP pilot program failed to reach its goals and tasked electric utilities with designing a more transparent approach that focused on consumer benefits and utility company accountability. There will be a two-phase review focused on impacts for ratepayers.
“This MRP Lessons Learned pilot gave us a clear record of what worked, what did not, and what must change if forward-looking ratemaking is to deliver real value for Maryland customers,” said Kumar Barve, PSC Commission Chair. “The Commission looks forward to additional discussion to better inform any future decisions.”
Emily Scarr is a senior advisor at Maryland Public Interest Research Groups (PIRG), a consumer advocacy organization working for solutions to problems that affect public health and safety. She said consumer groups have been fighting against this kind of ratemaking for years.
“The Public Service Commission findings align with what consumer groups have been arguing for years: forecasted ratemaking means Marylanders are paying more and getting less,” Scarr said. “The only group that benefited from this anti-consumer rate design was utility shareholders.”
Scarr was incensed at the notion that the commission was considering a comprehensive overhaul of MRPs rather than closing the door on the ratemaking model completely.
“Until our state leaders permanently end forecast ratemaking and other profit guarantees, ratepayers will continue to be at risk,” Scarr said. “Experimenting with anti-consumer ratemaking pilots once is a mistake. Twice is a choice. Instead of spending valuable staff time on considering any further rate increase based on future spending, the legislature should encourage the Commission to focus instead on restoring utility fiscal accountability and reining-in escalating rates and excessive profits.”
People who would like to speak at the public hearings must e-mail Administrative Officer Kimberly Schock at kimberly.schock@maryland.gov by noon on the following dates:
- by noon on Oct. 22 to speak at the Oct. 26 hearing
- by noon on Nov. 2 to speak at the Nov. 4 hearing
- by noon on Nov. 16 to speak at the Nov. 18 hearing
The hearings may be viewed live on the Commission’s YouTube Channel. Written comments are due by Dec. 23, 2026, and may be submitted through the Commission’s Public Comment Dropbox. All comments must reference Case No. 9888. Written comments may also be sent by first-class mail to:
Andrew S. Johnston, Executive Secretary
Maryland Public Service Commission
William Donald Schaefer Tower
6 St. Paul Street, 16th Floor
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
Editor’s note: This article has been updated to reflect the change that the PSC made to hold third meeting as an in-person public comment hearing and add the location.
