It?s not quite take it or leave it, but the legislation to implement the settlement of the lawsuit between Maryland and Constellation Energy is almost that, lawmakers were told Monday.
If there are substantial changes to the bill, “the deal would be off,” said Public Service Commission Chairman Steven Larsen. “Everybody?s preference is not to open up the bill for amendments.”
But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Thomas Mac Middleton and others on the committee emphasized that they?d like to see language that clearly establishes that the bill does not restrict them from returning to stricter regulation of utility companies.
“You?re going to need the votes from people who feel very strongly” about re-regulation, Middleton said. That is needed so “there?s not going to be any doubts … to get the comfort level that you need.”
Larsen told Middleton he would discuss the issue with Constellation. Paul Allen, the company?s senior vice president, said Constellation would be happy to debate about re-regulation, though he implied that would not be its preference.
Larsen emphasized the benefits to consumers from the settlement: a $170 rebate to each ratepayer, probably in September; a delay and reduction in distribution rates, which Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. hadn?t sought to increase in 15 years; and elimination of the liability for $1.5 billion in future costs.
Larsen and Allen both emphasized that the settlement eliminates uncertainty on both sides. The company need no longer fear that Maryland will reach back in time and try to recover moreof the power plant costs from a 1999 agreement when deregulation took place, Larsen said. The uncertainty had raised the costs of credit for BGE, Allen said.
