Climate Docket Dispatch
The Public Service Commission regulates the District’s utilities – Pepco and Washington Gas – and has the power to make or break our climate commitments. Read on for CCAN’s Docket Dispatch to learn about the live “dockets” at the Commission and see if our regulators are keeping up with the task.
Docket 1179
Project Pipes / District (un)SAFE
Docket 1180
Washington Gas Rate Case
Docket 1167
Gas Planning
Docket 1182
Electric Planning
Docket 1179: Accelerated Pipeline Replacement – also known as Project Pipes or District (un)SAFE
Washington Gas’s ongoing accelerated pipeline replacement project is a massive, $12 billion dollar plan to replace every methane gas pipe in the city – whether it needs it or not. Rather than targeting dangerous and polluting methane leaks, the program focuses on replacement based on pipe material, an imperfect model in which fully functional pipes are replaced all the time – and gas customers foot the bill. In the past ten years, it’s led to no reduction in gas leaks in the District. Yet Washington Gas champions this program, as this method of wholesale pipe replacement is far more profitable to Washington Gas, and more expensive to customers, than modern technologies for repairing leaking pipes.
In docket 1179, the Public Service Commission is considering District (un)SAFE – Washington Gas’s latest $215 million proposal for the third phase of its accelerated pipeline replacement program. This proposal requests 43% more than any previous phase, which means if approved, gas bills – also known as “rates” – would increase for everyone who pays them.
Summer 2025 Update
In June, we brought the public to the PSC for community hearings on District (un)SAFE, and asked the Commissioners: What side are you on? More than 40 D.C. residents turned out to testify and even more organized direct actions at both hearings – a die in and a song. You can read testimony from CCAN here, and if you couldn’t make the hearings in June then the docket is still open for public comment! Tell the PSC to stop Project Pipes once and for all by emailing PSC-CommissionSecretary@dc.gov.
And thanks to the efforts of CCANers, two ANCs passed resolutions opposing District un(SAFE) in May and June. Thanks to ANC 2B and 3B for standing with us against Washington Gas’s pollution plan!
Back and forth also continues over the extended Project Pipes 2, ongoing through the end of 2025. D.C. government filed objections to Washington Gas’s proposed project list, following a series of data requests for information the utility failed to provide. DCG points out ballooning costs for projects – almost 4 ½ times as high as the average past cost to replace service lines – and a failure to prioritize the highest risk pipes, given hundreds of pipes prioritized in the next phase are less than 25 years old. Washington Gas responded by doubling down.
What’s Next?
After hearing from the public and reviewing issues of material fact submitted by the intervenors, the Commission will decide if hearings to review inconsistent facts on the impact of District (un)SAFE are needed – evidentiary hearings – or if they will only host a legislative-style hearing on matters of policy. And stay tuned for a decision from the Commission on the projects for the ongoing phase of Pipes 2.
- In April 2025, the PSC denied a motion from the Sierra Club and DC government to reconsider their decision to extend Project Pipes 2.
- In March 2025, the PSC approved a $34 million dollar extension of the ongoing phase of Project Pipes until the end of 2025. Commissioner Beverly wrote a scathing dissent of this decision, including this powerful condemnation of District (un)SAFE: “District SAFE is not a new plan or a plan at all. It is essentially the continuation of Pipes 2, rebranded as District SAFE. All it does is present a request for more money to develop project lists in the future just as it would have done under Pipes 2, as though the Commission never said anything about the need for a new approach. Allowing this “plan” to move forward embraces the same failed pipe replacement strategy that the Commission disavowed in Order No. 22003. To me, this entire exercise has become a waste of time and money with no real benefit to the climate.” Read his full dissent here.
- In February 2025, eight DC Councilmembers signed on to a letter urging the PSC to reject Washington Gas’s accelerated pipeline replacement program once and for all.
- In November 2024, 22 organizations called on the PSC to reject District SAFE and end the accelerated pipeline replacement program for good.
- In November 2024, almost 700 DC residents filed comments with the Commission demanding they reject the new District SAFE proposal and instead invest in leak repair
- In October 2024, the PSC granted a 2 month, $8.5 million extension of Project Pipes Phase 2
- In September 2024, Washington Gas refiled for a new phase of Project Pipes, renamed District SAFE, to greenwash their pollution plan
- In June 2024, the PSC denied Washington Gas’s application for Project Pipes Phase 3
- In April 2024, the DC Attorney General urged the PSC to pause Project Pipes
- In February 2024, the PSC said Project Pipes is not “just and reasonable or otherwise in the public interest”
- In February 2024, 11 DC Councilmembers sent a letter to the PSC opposing Project Pipes Phase 3
- In February 2024, though the PSC ultimately approved a 1-year, $50 million extension to Phase 2 of Project Pipes, PSC Commissioner Richard Beverly wrote a strong dissent and cited local advocacy and opposition
- In December 2023, the PSC temporarily put Project Pipes on “pause” after 26 organizations called on the PSC to reject Project Pipes completely
Docket 1180: Washington Gas Rate Case
In August 2024, Washington Gas submitted an application to raise gas bills or “rates” by 12%, generating $33.9 million of additional revenue for the monopoly utility. The company also asks for an increased rate of return of 7.8% and a return on equity of 10.50%. This return on equity is far higher than the average forecast for returns on an investment – meaning Washington Gas is justifying higher prices for residents like you so they can pay their wealthy shareholders extra.
The rate case also includes a weather normalization adjustment, which would add surcharges or credits to customer’s bills from October through May to stabilize bills based on average weather – allowing Washington Gas to make extra money when winters are warmer than expected – rather than simply having customers pay for the gas they use. In docket 1180, the PSC is deciding whether or not to approve this application, or a modified version of it.
Summer 2025 Update
After nearly 70 D.C. residents testified against Washington Gas’s rate hike, the Commission responded to pressure by scheduling an evidentiary hearing. This hearing will be an opportunity for parties to cross examine one another, and may help us get answers to questions Washington Gas is dodging. But, as Commissioner Beverly noted in his dissent, many of these outstanding issues should be solved through the normal discovery process, and Washington Gas’s refusal to cooperate is gunking up the Commission’s process.
For example, after receiving a barely half-hearted answer the first time around, the Sierra Club again requested information on if ratepayer money is being used to fund Washington Gas’s lawsuits against D.C.’s climate laws. Now, despite the Commission agreeing this is a material issue of fact in their June 24th Order, by July 2nd they’d seemingly changed their minds and decided not to require a response from the monopoly utility on most of the outstanding questions.
The breakdown of the Commission’s process is a serious barrier to a fair result, and we need to keep the public pressure up so the Commissioners know we have our eyes on them.
What’s next?
Stay tuned for updates from us on an action at the August hearing to keep the pressure on the PSC to reject this rate hike! Save the date for August 5 for an evidentiary hearing, although the date may be shifted due to witness availability.
- In May 2025, Washington Gas filed the final rejoinder testimony, and intervenors all filed lists of material issues of fact.
- In April 2025, nearly 70 D.C. residents testified at community hearings against the rate hike.
- In January 2025, four intervenors filed direct testimony on Washington Gas’s proposed rate hike, and all has significant objections to Washington Gas’s proposal.
- In August 2024, Washington Gas filed an application for a rate hike. This application comes just seven months after the company’s last rate hike went into effect.
Docket 1167: Gas Planning
Docket 1167 has long been the home of Washington Gas’s and Pepco’s “climate business plans,” long term “plans” that lay out unfulfilled suggestions for programs that could address the utilities’ climate impact. Historically, the Commission has failed to require them to be implemented, even partially, by the utilities.
In response to repeated demands from residents, intervenors, and even the DC Council, the PSC is expanding the scope of the “climate business plans” docket to help envision real climate solutions regarding the future of gas in DC. The PSC has requested stakeholder comments from interested organizations and experts on the feasibility of establishing a gas planning proceeding in the District.
Summer 2025 Update
Stakeholders filed reply comments to the initial round of comments on if and how the Commission should pursue gas planning, including environmental groups and Washington Gas. D.C. government also filed a whitepaper on how to effectively address gas leaks in the District. The report first shows that the percent of D.C. residences using gas in our homes is falling.
Then, the report walks through four repair focused alternatives to Project Pipes. It demonstrates how each is more effective at reducing gas leaks than advanced pipeline replacement to address aging pipes.
But is any of this in Washington Gas’s plans? Of course not. No, their 500 page 15 year plan doubles down on gas use and ignores its true impact on our climate and health.
What’s next?
The Commission also extended deadlines for comments on what reporting and evaluation criteria are necessary to measure the impact of Washington Gas’s activities on the District’s climate goals. Initial comments are now due July 25 and replay comments on August 22.
- In April 2025, stakeholders filed initial comments on the feasibility of gas planning, highlighting the need for both short term immediate action and long term planning for the future of thermal energy in the District. Read comments from CCAN and other environmental groups, D.C. government, and Washington Gas.
- In February 2025, the Commission extended the deadline for stakeholder comments on gas planning from February 10 to March 27. This also updates the reply comment deadline to May 12.
- In December 2024, the Public Service Commission requested gas planning comments from stakeholders and another round of climate business plans from the utilities while planning processes are considered. Commissioner Beverly dissented, arguing “it makes no sense” to force Washington Gas to complete a plan without the benefit cost analysis due later this year, and disagrees with delays on the development of this BCA.
Docket 1182: Electric Planning
Docket 1182 was opened in November 2024 to collect comments on integrated distribution system planning (IDSP), which focuses on optimizing and modernizing the electric system to meet demands. Given DC’s climate commitments, advocates and officials hope this docket will lead to the development of a framework for Pepco’s planning that factors in the District’s increasing need for electricity due to the transition off of methane gas.
Summer 2025 Update
Pepco filed their long range plan, as directed by the Commission, outlining expected customer growth and planned capital expenditures.
What’s next?
There’s no procedural schedule for this docket, so we’re waiting on decisions from the Commission to direct what happens next.
- In March and April 2025, experts submitted initial comments and reply comments outlining recommendations for a process to conduct integrated distribution system planning.
- In December 2024, Commissioner Beverly published a letter with additional questions for stakeholders to answer, particularly about what data and information the Commission needs to collect from Pepco and how the process could ensure a transparent outcome.
- In November 2024, the PSC asked interested stakeholders to submit comments on IDSP, including responding to a strawman proposal.
Stay tuned for more! If you have questions or want to get involved, email claire@chesapeakeclimate.org.
