Testimony of Lara Levison
Sierra Club District of Columbia Chapter
Hearing on
B26-0596, the “Utility Rates and Ratemaking Amendment Act of 2026”
and
Exploring Policy Solutions to Improve Utility Affordability
Committee on Transportation and the Environment
June 29, 2026
Councilmember Allen, thank you for the opportunity to testify at this hearing on energy affordability. My name is Lara Levison, I’m the Energy Committee Chair for the Sierra Club District of Columbia Chapter, and I’m testifying on behalf of the chapter. The Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with millions of members and supporters, including 7,000 DC residents.
Introduction
Affordable energy, clean energy, and economic justice are entwined goals. The detrimental effects of climate change often are first and most intensely felt by people of color, low-income communities, and indigenous peoples. Moreover, any genuine sense of justice includes environmental justice. It is essential that the benefits of a clean energy economy be shared by all, and that the clean energy economy rectifies the injustice of the status quo.
That is why the Sierra Club joined with a broad coalition of environmental justice and national environmental groups to sign the 2019 Equitable and Just Climate Platform (now the Platform for a Just Climate Agenda). It is why our DC Chapter of the Sierra Club asked you to enact the Healthy Homes Act, to electrify the homes of 30,000 low and moderate-income DC residents free of charge, and why we fight for funding to implement it. Affordable energy is a central principle of our advocacy in DC.
Utility Rates and Ratemaking Amendment Act of 2026 (B26-0596)
Regarding B26-0596, the Sierra Club appreciates Robert White’s effort to draft a bill that addresses the sharp and sustained increases in utility bills of DC residents and businesses in recent years. But the District of Columbia really needs an ambitious energy bill that will directly rein in utility spending, reduce customer bills, and meet the District’s climate commitments. After careful consideration, we have determined that this bill does not meet those needs.
Pepco and the Public Service Commission have used multi-year rate plans to allow electric rates to soar, and DC families feel that pain every month when paying utility bills. Unlike traditional retroactive rate cases, which require utilities to justify spending after the fact and create an incentive to control costs, multi-year rate plans guarantee cost recovery in advance and can encourage excessive spending. We think reforms beyond limiting mutli-year rate plans are needed. Ultimately, no matter what the rate schedule is, the onus is on the Commissioners at the Public Service Commission to do their jobs by providing adequate oversight of DC’s utilities. The Council should devote some effort to appointing Commissioners who will provide proper oversight of the District’s utilities.
The Sierra Club opposes the amendment to section 923 that would allow the gas utility to recover costs associated with eligible gas infrastructure replacement projects. This bill does not define what constitutes an eligible gas infrastructure project and therefore would not compel the Commission or Washington Gas to deviate from business as usual. Instead, gas infrastructure projects should be limited to leak detection and repair. And the Commission should make clear to the gas utility that DC is committed to moving toward a clean energy future and away from methane gas, and that the company should develop a real plan for that eventuality.
Implementation of the District’s climate and energy affordability laws
The committee asked for comment on “delays in implementing the District’s climate and energy affordability laws.” Unfortunately, we could talk all day about the delays on the part of the mayor and the Public Service Commission, from small to large. Delays by the mayor include but are not limited to the following:
Raiding millions of dollars that should have gone into clean energy and energy efficiency programs and using those funds to pay the District’s energy bills. The mayor’s raid of $80 million dollars for FY27 and millions of dollars in the previous two fiscal years is severely limiting the Healthy Homes electrification program, Solar for All, energy efficiency upgrades, and the whole suite of energy affordability programs and renewable energy programs managed by the DC Sustainable Utility. These programs make energy more affordable.
Delaying and undermining net zero energy building code standards for new buildings, both government and private sector buildings.
Repeatedly attempting to weaken and delay the Building Energy Performance Standards for large buildings.
Failing to release the Clean Energy DC 2.0 Plan, the roadmap for the District to reach our clean energy future.
Selecting a majority of Public Service Commissioners who serve the interests of the utility companies and their shareholders, not the needs of DC ratepayers.
Delays and failures by the Public Service Commission include but are not limited to the following:
Taking no effective steps to achieve the District’s requirements to reduce climate emissions, set in law by the DC Council in the Climate Commitment Act in 2022 (D.C. Law 24-176).
- Failing to make it clear to Washington Gas that the company must stop its massive and massively expensive project of replacing gas pipelines and instead develop a new business model that is not based on fossil fuel combustion. Pipes should only be replaced when urgently needed to prevent dangerous leaks of methane gas.
- Failing to make it clear to Pepco that the company should energetically support the deployment of solar energy and battery storage rather than throwing up roadblocks.
- Failing to protect DC consumers from predatory energy providers.
I would like to expand on that last point. The mayor’s Budget Support Act included a welcome provision to reduce predatory practices by suppliers of electricity and methane gas that compete with Pepco and Washington Gas. I’m referring to “Subtitle E. Retail Energy Market Consumer Protection.”[i] Some companies have taken advantage of consumers by enrolling them in plans without their permission, failing to provide clear terms in their contracts, significantly overcharging, or charging large cancellation fees. This provision will provide necessary protections for customers, and we urge the Council to retain it in the final version of the Budget Support Act.
The DC Council can and should do more, too. DC’s clean energy programs need to be fully funded. Other jurisdictions are moving forward with innovative and effective programs that reduce air pollution, cut greenhouse gases, and improve energy efficiency and affordability in the near- and longer-term, and the District needs to do more in this area. The Council has several bills on deck this year that we want to see enacted, including the GRID Act, automatic enrollment in energy affordability programs, and the Shine Safely Act to eliminate light bulbs containing toxic mercury and improve light bulb efficiency.
Sierra Club Public Service Commission Testimony on Energy Affordability
Earlier this month, the Sierra Club testified on energy affordability before the Public Service Commission. We submitted the full testimony to the Commission and include it as Addendum #1 to the testimony for this hearing. But briefly, our message is that local regulators have multiple tools for reining in the costs of energy generation, and they can and should use those tools. The tools include:
- Procurement Strategies: Procuring more energy through Power Purchase Agreements for renewable energy to lock in lower and more stable prices. If DC had locked in a substantial portion of Standard Offer Service electricity supply through long-term, fixed-price renewable energy contracts several years ago, customers today could be paying substantially lower and more stable generation prices. Such a proposal was removed from 2018 clean energy legislation, resulting in higher electric bills of approximately $300 to $500 a year today.[ii]
- Distributed Energy Resources: Lowering the barriers to permitting and connecting solar energy to enable the use of distributed solar generation and battery storage as active grid cost management tools.
- Demand Response and Virtual Power Plants: Expanding the use of incentives and controls such as smart metering, automated thermostats, smart water heaters, and managed EV charging to reduce peak demand, which disproportionately impacts cost. Creating a virtual power plant (VPP), defined by RMI as “a collection of small-scale energy resources that, aggregated together and coordinated with grid operations, can provide the same kind of reliability and economic value to the grid as traditional power plants.”
- Dynamic Rate Design: Implementing monetary incentives to reduce peak demand. These include rates based on fixed time periods as well as the more precise real-time rates that price energy based on its market cost when it is used. It is even possible for dynamic rate systems to be linked to thermostats, chargers, and batteries so that they respond to price changes. Ratepayers would opt in voluntarily.
Engaging with Regional Grid Managers (PJM Interconnection)
DC has ample opportunity to influence both the price and the source of electricity supplied to it on the regional electric grid. We have a voice in the operation of PJM, our Regional Transmission Organization, and should make every effort individually and in collaboration with neighboring states to fight for better management to control costs and achieve clean-energy targets.
In particular, DC along with other jurisdictions should push PJM to improve its transmission planning to enable quick connection of clean energy projects. DC should also push PJM to remove its preferences for gas projects and clear the backlog of clean energy projects so that clean energy projects can compete on a level playing field. Data centers, now a major new source of demand on a strained grid with real reliability worries, must also be made to cover costs of any capacity shortfalls or reliability challenges they create. Data center developers and owners should be required to pay for their own electric generation and grid costs and ensure the demand is met with renewable energy, energy efficiency, and demand response.
The most immediate chance to influence PJM is in less than one month, July 23, when the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will host a technical summit at its DC headquarters focused on PJM stakeholder governance reform. The Sierra Club encourages elected officials to attend and voice the urgency of these reform solutions. Also, this fall, FERC will host a multi-state technical conference, which will likely take significant cues from the outcomes of the FERC July summit on topical priorities. These are excellent opportunities to apply pressure on PJM to do far better for the ratepayers of DC and surrounding states.
We should not make the mistake of thinking that relying on out-of-state energy supplies means we have no voice in the price or the kind of energy we buy. DC should look for and take every opportunity to use its voice on behalf of its ratepayers with PJM. The Sierra Club’s PJM 2026 Governance Reform Brief is attached as Addendum #2.
Prohibit Charges that Solely Benefit Utility Shareholders
DC should follow the lead of other states and prohibit utility companies from charging ratepayers for lobbying, advertising, legal fees, and other activities that solely benefit utility shareholders.
Resources for Policy Proposals to Improve Energy Affordability
We have compiled a short list of studies and policy toolkits for the committee’s consideration:
RMI Energy Affordability Toolkit: State policies to lower electricity bills
Faster and Cheaper: Demand-Side Solutions for Rapid Load Growth, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, February 4, 2026
- Energy Hardship Project, National Energy Assistance Directors Association, 2026
- Energy Affordability in Washington, DC, Synapse/OPC, 2025
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important and timely topic.
Addendum #1: Sierra Club Energy Affordability Testimony to DC Public Service Commission