Pepco Dodges and Disappoints … Part II

by Larry Janezich

Posted Saturday, January 31

CM Charles Allen with meeting organizers ANC6A Chair Amber Gove and East Capitol Resident Suneel Kudaravalli at last Saturday’s Community Meeting on Hill East Power Surges. The couple in the front row suffered $10,000 in damages from power surges on the 1300 block of East Capitol.

Pepco Dodges and Disappoints … Part II

CM Charles Allen with meeting organizers ANC6A Chair Amber Gove and East Capitol Resident Suneel Kudaravalli at last Saturday’s Community Meeting on Power Surges.

Pepco Dodges and Disappoints on Hill East Power Surges – Part I covered Pepco’s presentation at the January 24 community meeting on electric power surges in Hill East.  The surges damaged numerous homes on the 1300 block of East Capitol over the last nine months and Pepco claimed that it is unlikely the company was liable.  

Part II is about the rest of the meeting with presentations from the Office of the People’s Counsel (OPC) – advocates for DC residents with claims against DC utilities – and the Public Service Commission (PSC) which regulates those utilities. 

In addition, Part II covers the struggle of a resident to find an explanation from Pepco and the PSC for numerous power outages in another Capitol Hill neighborhood 8 blocks closer to the Capitol. 

Adam Carlesco, Utility Attorney, (OPC)

After Pepco left the meeting as related in Part I, Adam Carlesco, Utility Attorney, (OPC), explained that the OPC is DC’s utility advocate for utility rate payers across all 8 wards of the District.  He told attendees: “You guys are not the only people we’ve heard from – there was a similar incident in Wards 3 and 4 back in August.”

In that case, a power surge seemed to be the result of a re-closure issue associated with Pepco’s restoration of electricity following an outage.  OPC has filed a complaint (case #1185) with the PSC related to that event and subsequently added a complaint in Ward 6.  Carlesco told attendees they were welcome to provide comment in that case and that “OPC has requested the Commission open a formal investigation into outages like this to make sure “Pepco is engaging in restoration practices that don’t result in a power surge…we want to make sure that protocols are being observed and that they are in order.”  To date, the PSC has not granted a hearing in the case. 

He added, “We’re also asking for … an audit of Pepco’s claims process – we’re getting these auto denials across the board under the guise of this being an act of God.  In addition to getting the audit and the claims process looked at we want to see when they’re applying these act of God considerations and when customers are actually being compensated.”  Carlesco said that OPC was asking that the complaints of the residents of the 1300 block be included in the case pending before PSC. 

Carlesco was followed by Maurice Smith, Director of the Office of Consumer Services, PSC, and the office immediately responsible for handling consumer complaints.  He told attendees that “just because you get a denial of a complaint from Pepco that’s not the end of the road for you.  You can contact PSC and we can go into the resident claims process and have a legal determination which is appealable to the courts.” 

Maurice Smith, Director of the Office of Consumer Services, PSC, Margaret Moscowitz, head of PSC Complaint Division, and Steve Martin, PSC attorney.

Margaret Moscowitz, who leads PSC Complaint Division, told attendees there are additional remedies available to them, and referring to an earlier mention of a possible lawsuit said, “you do have to exhaust the administrative remedies available through the PSC before you can go to a court of law with a company that is under our jurisdiction.”  She listed the steps in the process: 

• (Filing a claim against the company)
• If Pepco denies your claim you can come to the PSC and file a complaint against Pepco
• PSC will do an investigation and file a complaint
• Pepco will have 14 business days to respond
• PSC will contact the complainant with Pepco’s response
• PSC can offer mediation
• If you’re not satisfied with the results of mediation you can progress through the administrative process to a formal PSC hearing
• (If the decision there is not in your favor) You can appeal that decision
• If the appeal is unsuccessful, you can go to court which can award damages

Capitol Hill resident Valerie Jablow attended the meeting.  She is not a resident of the 1300 block of East Capitol, but lives in a neighborhood 8 blocks closer to the Capitol Building which has experienced outages and surges.  She cited her difficulty in getting an explanation from PSC and Pepco for several outages that happened last year. 

Subsequently, in accordance with Carlesco’s suggestion, she joined the comments on case #1185 pending before the PSC.  Parts of those comments follow: 

“I experienced 4 power outages in 2025: two in February (2/11 and 2/20) and two in October (10/9 and 10/14), affecting more than 1,000 customers on Capitol Hill, starting in the 400 block of A NE and going east…”

After petitioning Pepco for an explanation, and receiving no response, Jablow asked the PSC to intervene with Pepco on her behalf.  The PSC did and told Jablow Pepco had 14 days to respond.  Six weeks later, after additional prodding, Pepco’s attributed two February outages to an equipment failure and an unknown cause and offered no explanation for the October outages. 

On 10/23/25, the DC council held a hearing on Pepco problems in 2025. Then, on 1/24/26, there was a public meeting at the NE Library about Pepco problems in the 1300 block of East Capitol.

Jablow says most of the issues raised at both public hearings, spanning half of DC’s wards, are similar to what she experienced in her outages, including: 

• No warning, no storm, no wind before the outages.
• Personal damages incurred (sometimes amounting to thousands of dollars per household).
• Problems with Pepco infrastructure leading to repeated power failures and surges
• Public safety compromised and damage incurred by Pepco’s poor responsiveness to incidents
• Poor/nonexistent public notification and tracking of problems by Pepco.

In her comments, Jablow asked the Commission for a formal hearing on all matters petitioned by the OPC, an explanation for Pepco for all outages experienced by residents in 2025, clarity about reimbursement, and responses to happen before June 2026.

In addition, Jablow has reached out to the Office of the DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb (OAG), about recent Pepco issues that “have affected thousands in half of DC’s wards because it appears that the DC Public Service Commission is reluctant to hold Pepco accountable.”   She asked if this is something AOG could be involved with on behalf of DC residents.  The letter said that “despite the urging of the Office of the People’s Counsel, the DC public service commission has not held a hearing on this matter.”

Jablow’s letter echo’s the Sierra Club’s criticism of PSC’s “cozy” relationship with Pepco and other utilities it regulations.  The Sierra Club and other watchdog groups have a critical and adversarial view of the PSC, though stopping short of a claim of “regulatory capture.”  Here’s a list of some of The Sierra Club’s criticisms:

• acting in the interest of utilities rather than the public
• “rubber-stamping” Pepco’s requests
• PSC approval of a $123 million rate hike costing the average DC resident almost $150
• prioritizing utility profitability over local climate commitments and consumer protections.