|
|
|
|
|
Joint Maryland Exelon Utilities: "Maryland Must Give The Utilities The Ability To Build Generation Infrastructure To Resolve The Current In-State Supply And Demand Gap"
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
In comments to the Maryland PSC in a proceeding concerning generation procurement models, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company,
Potomac Electric Power Company, and Delmarva Power & Light Company (collectively, the Joint Maryland Exelon Utilities or JMEU) said, "Utility-generated energy would improve reliability, reduce supply costs, protect customers
from price volatility, with the intention of complementing, and not replacing, competitive
generation. Maryland must give the utilities the ability to build generation infrastructure to resolve
the current in-state supply and demand gap and to accommodate growing supply needs."
"The JMEU emphasizes that the conversation regarding resource adequacy should include
utility-owned generation as a solution. Maryland is facing an energy security crisis that threatens the affordability, reliability, and sustainability of electricity for customers," JMEU said
JMEU said that a study to be undertaken by the PSC concerning generation procurement, "must describe how [the models] will align with, or replace the
current SOS model".
In separate comments, Maryland PSC Staff said, "Utility-owned, rate-based generation should be carefully scrutinized for cost impacts to
ratepayers. If applied, Staff recommends considering how best to establish guidelines for
application of the model".
Staff also offered a Generation Capacity Credit (GCC) model
The GCC model would establish generation capacity credits that would be used to pay for
generation procured through an agreement. Each electricity supplier would be required to purchase
credits to pay for procured generation in proportion to the supplier’s capacity obligation.
The GCC, "would allow for procurement costs to be
recovered through the energy supply rate rather than the distribution base rate, or a
surcharge if cost recovery occurs through the utility."
Staff said, "In this scenario, electricity suppliers would purchase the GCC credits to pay for the
procured generation, and the cost of the credit is likely to be passed through to the ratepayer
through the supplier’s rates for electricity service. From the ratepayer perspective, they would be
paying for the contract through their energy supply charge. Conversely, if the contract were paid
by reimbursing the utility for contract expenses, ratepayer costs would be embedded in distribution
rates or potentially a surcharge."
"Staff offers two considerations for this Study based on these observations. One
consideration is whether there is greater opportunity to reduce cost, or reason to prefer to include
the cost of contract-procured generation in energy supply, distribution, or surcharge rates. The
second consideration is whether it would be cheaper to pay the cost of the contract directly through
the utilities rather than installing an intermediary payment mechanism to direct utility procurement
costs through wholesale suppliers first," Staff said
PC66, PC 66
ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Md. PSC Staff: "Utility-Owned, Rate-Based Generation Should Be Carefully Scrutinized For Cost Impacts"
Staff Poses Generation Capacity Credit Model, Similar To RECs, Obligation Could Be Applied To Retail Suppliers
January 23, 2026
Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW -- Account Executive (Commercial Retail Energy)
|
|
|
|
|