News Stories

On May 20, 2026 the District of Columbia PUC issued an order accepting Atrium Economics, LLC’s (“Atrium”) Audit Report on Potomac Electric Power Company’s District of Columbia Standard Offer Service Administrative Charge (“Report”).

This Order also directs Commission Staff to convene a Standard Offer Service Working Group meeting within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order and directs the Potomac Electric Power Company (“Pepco”) to comply with the directives within paragraphs 17 to 21.

“The Commission accepts the Atrium Report and provides several directives based on both Atrium’s recommendations and the comments received on the Atrium Report. In response to OPC’s comments regarding the PPA, we note that the Commission, by Order No. 22702, approved a PPA serving five percent (5%) of the SOS load, and directed Pepco to attempt a target quantity of up to twenty-five percent (25%) of the SOS load through renewable energy PPAs. 48.”

Adopted 7 Recommendations:

Recommendation 1. “Atrium found that for the period June 2021 to May 2022, $3,602.46 of fringe benefits and payroll taxes-associated wholesale bidding expense charges were recorded to a distribution account and duplicated in the 2021 Cost of Service. 49 Atrium recommends that Pepco institute a process to view the mapping of all SOS administrative charge incremental expenses to verify that the charge account either directly maps to a non-distribution FERC account or is flagged to a distribution account. The Commission agrees with this recommendation and directs Pepco to institute a process to comply with this recommendation, as this verification by Pepco should be sufficient to assign costs to appropriate accounts. Pepco corrected the $3,602.46 duplication in its March 2, 2026, SOS filing, and the error occurred only in 2021.50 14.”

Recommendation 2. “Atrium recommends that Pepco provide a correction of the duplicate ICF charges in the amount of $51,000 that was recovered through the administrative charge. Atrium also recommends that Pepco employ consistent classification of like charges from year to year. The Commission agrees with Atrium’s recommendations and confirms that Pepco removed this duplicative cost in its March 2, 2026, SOS retail rates filing.”

 Recommendation 3. “Atrium noted one instance in which a GS-LV customer erroneously had SOS charges excluded from their bill, resulting in a lower bill. After Pepco confirmed the error, the Company reviewed all customer contracts that had SOS charges excluded in the billing system and identified twelve (12) customer contracts where this issue occurred and corrected this issue for each account. Except for these 12 customers, all other contracts that had SOS charges excluded in the billing system were with a third-party supplier, not SOS customers. Atrium recommends that at least one customer from each class and any subgroups of each rate class be selected for monthly testing to ensure that all SOS customers are correctly receiving the approved SOS administrative charge. The Commission agrees with Atrium’s recommendation and believes that regular sampling of customer bills is a good practice and supports additional sampling to include one bill from each rate class for monthly testing to ensure SOS rates are appropriately applied. Therefore, the Commission directs Pepco to comply with Atrium’s recommendation. To ensure compliance with this direction, the Commission additionally directs Pepco to file a “Sampling Report” within thirty (30) days after the sampling process is established and first performed. The Sampling Report will cover one month of charges and include at least one customer from each customer class, noting any inconsistencies in charges applied.”

Recommendations 4, 5, and 6.  “Several of Atrium’s recommendations involve the adder, which reflects the retail electricity suppliers’ marketing costs in SOS rates in order to ensure that the suppliers are not placed at a competitive disadvantage.52 The Commission agrees with Pepco and believes that revisions to the adder should be discussed in an SOS Working Group meeting as part of the SOS Biennial Review currently taking place. Therefore, Commission Staff is directed to convene one or more SOS Working Group meetings as needed, with the first meeting convening within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order. Topics of the SOS Working Group meeting should include discussions of Atrium’s recommendations 4, 5, and 6, as well as the other issues discussed in the 2025 SOS Biennial Review. Pepco, as the SOS Administrator, is directed to prepare and file a report within thirty (30) days of the final SOS Working Group meeting that details recommendations ma de by stakeholders regarding the discussion items, including both consensus and non-consensus items.”

Recommendation 7. “Atrium recommends that Pepco draft a conformance memo to document properly allowable CREF incremental expenses, as Pepco has a Key Financial Control to produce a conformance memo for significant changes to regulatory deferrals due to Commission orders, and Pepco did not develop any conformance memos for the period under audit, even though the treatment of CREF costs has significantly impacted the SOS administrative charge. The Commission agrees with this recommendation and directs Pepco to complete its conformance memo within 90 days of the date of this Order and file a letter in the Formal Case No. 1017 docket confirming that it has been completed. Absent a legal justification, the Commission also directs Pepco to file its internal conformance memo on CREF costs by August 31, 2026.”