Council Grills Pepco Over Latest Outages

Pepco executives spent two hours on the hot seat on Monday afternoon when members of the Montgomery County Council asked them for an update on their improvements and an explanation for another storm's worth of multi-day outages. 

"I don't see the utility of the utility," Councilman Marc B. Elrich (D-At large) of Takoma Park said towards the end of the question and answer period.

Council members Roger Berliner (D-Dist. 1) of Potomac, Nancy M. Floreen (D-At large) of Garrett Park and Hans Riemer (D-At large) of Silver Spring got first crack at asking Pepco about the possible rate increase, what went wrong in the last storm and what is holding up further improvements.

Pepco Executive Vice President David M. Velazquez answered most of the questions and delivered the testimony.

"We're not where we need to be—in meeting expectations or clear communications," Velazquez said, adding that the company was committed to closing that gap.

Most of Pepco's response Monday afternoon referred back to a six-point improvement plan scheduled to improve service over the next five years, including tree maintenance, priority feeder work, distribution automation, load growth, underground cable replacement and selective undergrounding of current wires. 

Berliner, the chairman of the council's Transportation, Energy, Infrastructure and Environment Committee, asked Velazquez and the rest of the executive team from Pepco what constraints kept them from speeding up the timetable. Velazquez responded that the amount of infrastructure improvements could not be done in one year.

"Improvements will be seen as we go along," he said in response to a similar question from Councilman George L. Leventhal (D-At large) of Takoma Park. "But it will take us a number of years to go through the infrastructure."

Other councilmembers asked what had been done since widespread outages following storms in February and July of last year. Pepco representatives said that in addition to 900 miles of tree trimming, they had added an additional $10 million each year for capital improvements.

"It’s getting discouraging," Floreen said. "I’ve been having these meetings since 2003. We’ve had this conversation. It’s a Groundhog Day experience.”

Riemer asked if the utility was still seeking a rate increase. Velazquez did not deny it.

The County Council doesn't have direct control over Pepco, so the meeting served primarily as a forum for council members to speak about the recent storm.

Leventhal acknowledged that with the exception of Berliner, the council's lack of technical knowledge prevented them from following up as deeply as they would have wished with the executives' responses.

"It's clear to me that Pepco is able to avoid questions,” Leventhal said. 

Paired with Pepco's testimony was a presentation from Ursula Schryver, director of customer programs at the American Public Power Association, a trade group for utilities owned by municipalities and communities.

Public power follows many counties' wishes for their power infrastructure to be under local control, to reinvest profits and to provide potentially lower rates, Schryver said.

While the cost to the county to purchase infrastructure from Pepco to form a public power company was cited as a possible barrier, Elrich argued that, in the long term, the cost savings would go back directly the county.

"We're paying them anyway," Elrich said.