The Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) is set to conduct three public comment sessions regarding Baltimore Gas and Electric Company’s (BGE) proposal to change its electric base rates (Case No. 9888).
These public hearings are scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. on the following dates: Monday, October 26, Wednesday, November 4, and Wednesday, November 18. The first two sessions will take place online, while the last session will be held in-person at the following address:
Frank O. Heintz Hearing Room
William Donald Schaefer Tower
6 St. Paul Street, 16th Floor
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
The PSC oversees the regulation of electric and gas utilities, phone service providers, as well as private water and sewer companies. Recently, the Commission released a report titled “Lessons Learned,” which outlines its analysis of the state’s multi-year rate plan (MRP) pilot program.
Initiated in February 2020, the MRP pilot program was led by BGE, followed by approvals for Potomac Electric Power Company and Delmarva Power & Light Company to also adopt multi-year plans.
The MRP pilot program permitted utilities such as BGE to determine rates based on anticipated costs and budgets, rather than solely relying on historical expenses. This means that BGE could forecast its anticipated infrastructure expenditures for several years and raise rates gradually based on these forecasts. The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel remarked in 2023 that such plans enable utilities to charge customers for project costs before those projects are completed and ready to serve customers. This contrasts with traditional rate-making processes, which require utilities to finalize their work and demonstrate the incurred costs before adjusting rates to recover those expenses.
The PSC concluded that while there were some advantages for utility companies in using the forward-looking MRP rate-setting method, it did not yield any “clear, measurable benefits for ratepayers.” Moreover, they indicated that this approach complicated the rate-setting process, increasing the time and resources needed for rate proceedings. It also failed to stabilize customer rates compared to traditional methods, did not significantly advance Maryland’s energy policy goals, and did not inspire greater innovation among utility providers.
Ultimately, the PSC determined that the MRP pilot program did not meet its intended objectives. They have instructed electric utilities to craft a more transparent framework that emphasizes customer benefits and accountability for utility companies. A two-phase assessment will be conducted focusing on the implications for ratepayers.
“This MRP Lessons Learned pilot provided us with valuable insights into what functions effectively, what falls short, and what needs adjustment to deliver genuine value to Maryland customers if forward-looking ratemaking is pursued,” stated Kumar Barve, Chair of the PSC. “The Commission anticipates fruitful discussions that will better inform future decisions.”
Emily Scarr, a senior advisor at Maryland Public Interest Research Groups (PIRG), a consumer advocacy organization, expressed their commitment to addressing issues impacting public health and safety. She emphasized that consumer advocacy groups have long opposed the concept of forward-looking ratemaking.
“The findings from the Public Service Commission reinforce what consumer advocates have contended for years: using forecasted ratemaking results in Maryland residents paying higher rates while receiving less value,” Scarr stated. “The only beneficiaries of this consumer-unfriendly rate structure are the utility shareholders.”
Scarr expressed frustration regarding the possibility that the commission may consider a thorough revision of MRPs instead of completely terminating this ratemaking model.
“Unless our state leaders permanently abolish forecast ratemaking and other profit guarantees, ratepayers will continue to face risks,” Scarr asserted. “Experimenting with consumer-harming ratemaking initiatives once is an error. Doing it again signifies a choice. Instead of dedicating valuable resources to evaluate future rate increases tied to projected spending, the legislature should direct the Commission to restore financial accountability among utilities and curtail rising rates and excessive profits.”
Individuals wishing to provide input during the public hearings should contact Administrative Officer Kimberly Schock via email at kimberly.schock@maryland.gov before noon on the following deadlines:
- by noon on October 22 to participate in the October 26 session
- by noon on November 2 to contribute to the November 4 session
- by noon on November 16 to engage in the November 18 session
The hearings will be streamed live on the Commission’s YouTube Channel. Written comments must be submitted by December 23, 2026, and can be delivered through the Commission’s Public Comment Dropbox. All submissions should reference Case No. 9888. For those preferring traditional mail, comments can be sent 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 allowing the PSC to hold a third meeting as an in-person public comment hearing and to include the location details.
