Utilities push tariffs and guarantees, warn of legal and practical limits of rushed mandates

Representatives from PE/PTOIC Edison and BGE told the commission they share the goal of keeping RBP costs off residential customers but cautioned about implementation risks and proposed different mechanisms.

PE/PTOIC Edison representatives said they are identifying the specific large‑load customers behind the forecasted adjustments and have begun outreach. Mark Zuka and Jessica Rabba described a two‑step approach: first determine which loads can be opted out under PJM rules (offset or opt‑out), and second secure firm commitments from those customers. PE proposed ordering utilities to file a tariff applicable to loads not opted out that would require adequate guarantees or collateral (including posting PJM collateral and demonstrating the ability to make 15‑year payments). PE said that if a customer refuses to provide collateral, the utility could opt that load out of the RBP and, under the tariff, require measures (monitoring, equipment) at the customer's expense or limit firm service to prevent the load from coming online.

BGE/Exelon counsel (Beverly Sakura) warned that imposing mandatory obligations on customers that are not yet fully defined could be vulnerable to legal challenge, might leave customers facing shifting rules, and in practice data centers have shown little appetite for interruptible service. BGE also described prior work exploring PJM peak‑shaving adjustments, saying PJM staff previously reduced the megawatt value they would accept and BGE instead pursued alternative PRD (price response) options at that time.

Both utilities said speed is essential for preserving options before PJM's procedural windows, but they emphasized that any order should include clear cost‑recovery language to compensate utilities for program development and implementation.