News Stories

Several legislators file letters urging the Commission to reject  a recommended decision issued by two Pennsylvania PUC Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) on August 21, 2026 adopting a nonunanimous settlement without modification regarding FirstEnergy’s request for approval of its default service program for the period from June 1, 2027 to May 31, 2031.

As reported previously, before the Pennsylvania PUC is a recommended decision that would approve FirstEnergy’s controversial and nonunanimous settlement default service settlement plan that included many anticompetitive retail choice provisions.

Note that approval of the Company’s Default Service Plan, as modified by the nonunanimous requires the Commission to issue a final order on the plan within nine months of the date that the plan was filed, or it is deemed approved. The plan was filed on February 3, 2026 and therefore must be addressed at the public meeting on October 22, 2026 or sooner.

Among other things the recommended decision includes a requirement for residential shopping customers to be automatically dropped to default service at the end of a fixed contract, absent affirmative consent for renewal.  The recommended decision would also require retail suppliers to obtain customer affirmative consent on a quarterly basis in order to continue to serve residential variable-priced, month-to-month plans.

The state representative comments focused primarily on aspects of the anti-choice provisions as heighted  below.

Also as reported previously, the recommended decision included dire provisions related to purchase of receivable (POR) plans, which were not directly addressed by the legislative comments but strenuously objected to by the retail energy industry.  For example, the recommended decision would require all POR customer contracts entered into after June 1, 2027, would be limited to products whose rate is at or below the price to compare at the time of enrollment.  This POR limitation would appear to apply to residential and non-residential service alike.

State Representative Comments

State Rep. Metzgar – “Competitive markets have delivered meaningful benefits to families and businesses across our Commonwealth, including offering price stability, time-of-use options, and a diverse range of services tailored to meet the needs of modern consumers. At a time when household costs are rising, preserving consumer choice and maintaining a healthy competitive marketplace is more important than ever. Any proposal to significantly alter our competitive market must be weighed carefully and addressed through the legislative process to avoid unintended consequences that limit options or increase costs.

For that reason, I respectfully urge the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to reject the proposed changes included in Docket No. P-2026-3060298 that would weaken competitive markets and impede customer choice. While affordability and consumer protection remain essential priorities, efforts to advance those goals must be consistent with the framework thoughtfully enacted by the General Assembly. Many elements of the Recommended Decision do not meet that standard.”

“Pennsylvania consumers deserve continued access to diverse electric generation options. Any significant changes affecting this structure must be rigorously evaluated through the appropriate legislative process and not through piecemeal regulatory action that risks undermining decades of policy success.”

Mandating an automatic transfer of EGS customers back to default service represents improper administrative overreach that exceeds the authority delegated to the Commission by the General Assembly. Under the Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act, the General Assembly explicitly established a legislative policy preference for competitive retail markets over utility monopoly supply.”

“Customers who actively choose to leave default service and select a competitive supplier have made a deliberate decision to participate in the open market. Treating the expiration of a fixed term contract as an immediate preference to abandon retail choice ignores customer intent. instead of forcing an automatic drop to default service, regulatory policy should honor clear supplier disclosure standards, existing renewal notice procedures, and continuous competitive options that preserve customer autonomy without forcing a return to a utility monopoly supply.”

Senator Phillips-Hill – “I respectfully urge the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to reject the proposed changes included in Docket No. P-2026-3060298 that would weaken competitive markets and impede customer choice. While affordability and consumer protection remain essential priorities, efforts to advance those goals must be consistent with the framework thoughtfully enacted by the General Assembly. Many elements of the Recommended Decision do not meet that standard.

As a senator whose district borders Maryland, I have seen the adverse impact on ratepayers when our neighbor to the south eliminated consumer choice has had on those ratepayers. This was done in a very public and transparent process.

“Pennsylvania consumers deserve continued access to diverse electric generation options. Any significant changes affecting this structure must be rigorously evaluated through the appropriate legislative process and not through piecemeal regulatory action that risks undermining decades of policy success.”

Senator Boscola – “I recognize that a uniform statewide framework does not necessarily require identical capacity limits in every utility territory. Smaller default-service classes may be more sensitive to the costs associated with large exporting projects. However, those differences should be addressed through transparent and objective standards based on the size of the aƯected class, eligible generation capacity and projected rate impacts, rather than through entirely different policies developed utility by utility.

I encourage the Commission to consider a similarly balanced approach in current and future proceedings. Policies that are overly restrictive, abrupt or materially inconsistent across utility territories could strand projects already under development, reduce the availability of new generation and undermine the investment needed to bring additional resources online.

As Democratic Chair of the Senate Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure Committee, I am continuing to work on legislation intended to provide greater consistency and clarity in Pennsylvania’s net-metering and customer-generation law. This issue demands a more uniform statewide framework, rather than continued resolution through individual utility proceedings, and I believe we can reach an agreement that works across the Commonwealth for the impacted rate classes and solar developers.

In the meantime, I respectfully ask the Commission to consider the broader implications of its decisions and avoid outcomes that create significantly different rules for comparable projects based solely on the electric distribution company or rate district serving the property.