The Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry on the issues associated with the regulatory treatment of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations and related services in the District. The Commission issued the following questions for comment:

"a. What is the projected load growth for the District in the next five years? What is the projected EV contribution to load growth for the District in the next five years?
b. What impact will EV charging have on Pepco's electrical distribution system? Pepco noted, in 2006, when it sought to discontinue the EV rates that there was "no basis in cost difference for distribution service." How will the growth of EV charging affect the electrical distribution system differently from other types of load growth?
c. Assuming EV charging impacts the electrical distribution system, what will the costs be to accommodate this added demand?
d. If there is a cost impact, should the EV rate be set such that it supports the costs of all distribution system enhancements required by EV charging? If not, how should the costs for distribution system enhancements be allocated among rate classes, owners of EVs, and owner/operators of EV charging stations?
e. The previous EV rates in the District were for the Residential rate class only, should EV rates be developed for additional rate classes?
f. Should EV rates use alternative rate structures such as Time-of-Use, Real- Time-Pricing, or other dynamic pricing to encourage EV charging patterns that will reduce the impact on the distribution grid?
g. How should the owner/operators of EV charging stations be regulated, if at all, in light of the Commission's jurisdiction over "electric companies" and "electric suppliers"?
h. What type and level of information about EV charging station installation and operations does Pepco need to plan for load growth in the distribution system and to ensure its safe and reliable operations? If the Commission does not regulate the owner/operators of EV charging stations, how might Pepco best obtain the required information?"

The Commission will determine the next course of action, including a rulemaking or stakeholder collaborative after reviewing comments received. Comments and reply comments are due 30 and 45 days, respectively, from the date of the Order. The full text of the Order is available on the NEM Website.

The Commission issued an interim Order in proceedings regarding BGE, Pepco and Delmarva smart grid and advanced metering infrastructure that would allow a customer to optout of utility smart meter installations by providing the utility with written notice of their decision. For consumers that already have smart meters installed, they may notify the utility in writing that they do not wish to have it activated. This opt-out option will be available pending a final Commission decision on the matter. The Commission also explicitly stated that, "We have not reached any decision as to whether to permit the customers of the utilities in these cases to 'opt-out' of receiving a smart meter permanently or, if so, what the terms of any possible future opt-out might include." The full text of the Interim Order is available on the NEM Website.

Staff will convene the inaugural meeting of the Retail Energy Market Stakeholder Forum on Friday, June 15, 2012, beginning at 10AM. The meeting will be held at the Commission's Albany Office in the 3rd floor hearing room.

The agenda for the meeting is as follows:
1. Organization & Logistics
• Describe purpose/objective of facilitating open dialogue toward idea exchange and finding solutions to retail competition matters
• Agreement on recurring schedule participation and ground rules (ex. nothing discussed is binding on the participants)
• Process for offering future agenda items and follow up on action items.
• Brief opening comments
2. Discussion Topics:
• Consumer education for residential consumers, especially the low-income customer segment
• ESCO input to consumer energy choice outreach materials disseminated by the utilities (since the ESCO community is now paying for the consumer marketing)
• Utility Consolidated Bill Format changes for retail choice and to reduce consumer confusion (i.e., thinking they are being double-billed by two companies)
• Access to utility data access and quality matters
3. New business
4. Wrap-up
• Agree on action items

The Commission's Order on facilitating natural gas market competition became effective in April 2012. One of the measures required by the Order was the establishment of the Price to Compare to include gas procurement costs, previously bundled in delivery rates. The gas utilities are required to identify and remove from delivery rates, their natural gas procurement costs in a Section 1308(a) proposed tariff filing. The gas procurement costs will then be included in the PTC on a per MCF or DTH revenue neutral basis.

The Commission has now established a schedule for the gas utilities to file their 1308(a) tariff filings in compliance with the new regulations as follows:

1. July 13, 2012, Filing Date — UGI and Dominion Peoples (via rate case filing);
2. September 30, 2012, Filing Date — Peoples TWP, Columbia Gas and PECO; and
3. November 12, 2012, Filing Date — NFG, Equitable, PGW and Valley Energy, Inc.

The full text of the Secretarial Letter is available on the NEM Website.