By Suzanne Herel
With the D.C. Public Service Commission poised to decide Wednesday on a timeline to consider the revised terms in Exelon’s bid for Pepco Holdings Inc., opponents spoke out Monday about why they still think the merger is a bad deal for the district.
“This new settlement that came out of the mayor’s office offers very little new beyond what was already on the table and ruled by the PSC as not being in the public interest,” said Anya Schoolman, executive director of DC Solar United Neighborhoods, one of more than 20 public interest groups that formed the Power DC coalition.
She called on the PSC to “shed light on the smoke and mirrors that are in this deal and the process in achieving this deal.”
The PSC voted unanimously in August to reject the acquisition after it had been approved by FERC and regulators in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey and Virginia.
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, initially opposed to the deal, later brokered an agreement with Exelon and Pepco that would provide the district $78 million in public benefits. (See Mayor’s Settlement Puts DC PSC on the Spot in Exelon-Pepco Deal.)
The companies are asking the PSC to reconsider its decision within 150 days; the intervenors who did not sign on to the settlement are asking for a June 30 deadline to give time for review and public hearings.
“This really should be treated as a new application, as it includes entirely new terms,” said Randy Speck, counsel for DC SUN.
Exelon spokesman Paul Elsberg said the companies’ proposed schedule “affords all parties a fair opportunity to present their positions and [ensures] the commission has a complete record to render its decision.”
The schedule proposes testimony be filed in November, hearings be held in early December and the final brief be filed in late December.
Schoolman also criticized the companies’ tactics, including a media blitz featuring full-page ads listing nonprofit groups that she said are being “bullied” into supporting the merger for fear their funding will be cut. Meanwhile, she said, residents are being approached to sign petitions by people being paid by the companies to collect names.
She also questioned the timing of a recently announced sponsorship deal in which, according to the Washington Business Journal, Pepco gave the district $25 million in return for naming rights on one or more landmarks. “It invites the question of quid pro quo,” Chesapeake Climate Action Network Director Mike Tidwell said.
Myra Oppel, PHI’s vice president for regional communications, said negotiations related to the naming rights deal began in 2013.
“Pepco and the District of Columbia executed a sale agreement in July under which the district will buy property in the Buzzard Point area that will be used to build a major league soccer stadium,” she said.
“Because the development will increase the value of property Pepco and its parent company will still own in the area and Pepco’s varied development and community interests across the District, Pepco sought an opportunity to sponsor one or more projects to be developed in district. The sponsorship rights agreement was signed with the district on Sept. 18, before the settlement agreement was signed. It is not conditioned on the merger closing and has value whether or not the merger closes.”
While the companies’ ad campaign touts the settlement as being good for the environment, Tidwell pointed out that no environmental groups signed on to the agreement.
“If it was a good deal for the environment, I think you would see some of the city’s best known groups supporting this,” he said. “They are all still opposed.”
Elsberg said the revised merger proposal will “accelerate the district’s progress toward its sustainability goals” by committing to the development of up to 10 MW of new solar generation and making it “easier and faster for customers to install solar panels.”
Critics say the deal allows Exelon to count 5 MW of solar already being built at a district sewage treatment plant and does not require the utility to charge fair-market rates for its output.
Also to be considered at Wednesday’s meeting is a filing of intent by newly formed advocacy group DC Public Power, which has outlined a plan to purchase Pepco’s D.C. assets post-merger and turn it into a not-for-profit utility. (See Group Proposes to Buy Pepco’s DC Assets.)
The companies filed a motion asking the PSC to reject the group’s request to intervene in the proceeding “to pursue arguments concerning the hypothetical and ill-defined acquisition of Pepco’s district-based assets by a not-for-profit with undisclosed control and capitalization.”
