The DC Public Service Commission can’t legally designate documents “confidential” to keep the Public in the dark about Pepco’s billing fraud, but it holds all the power and only cares about artificially inflating Exelon’s profits.
I am publishing a Public version of the record here. If I still can’t get an accurate Pepco bill based on a verifiable meter reading after all this work, nobody can. Pepco’s rate hikes are based on the fabricated meter readings I discovered. That violates the Public’s Constitutional right to due process.
Redactions are limited to my personal information. The official DC PSC docket for Levinson v. Pepco, Formal Hearing Case # CC9075277 is available at https://edocket.dcpsc.org/public/search/casenumber/cc9075277.
| Docket # | Date | Document | Description | Access | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CC9075277 – 37 | 3/27/2026 | OPC’s Notice of Withdrawal | • OPC unilaterally withdrew its representation as legal counsel for RBL on Friday, March 27, 2026, without notice. • OPC’s unethical withdrawal is an explicit endorsement of Pepco’s “pattern of material violations” of its legal obligations and the Commission’s unlawful refusal to investigate and hold hearings regarding the “pattern of material violations.” • RBL does not consent to OPC’s withdrawal and demands an immediate investigation and hearing to “order Exelon to divest its interest in Pepco on terms adequate to protect the interests of utility investors (including Exelon investors) and consumers and the public.” Order No. 18148. Attachment B, Page No. 21, Paragraph 105 (“Severance of hte Exelon – Pepco Relationship). | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 36 | 3/26/2026 | Pepco’s Response to Petition for Review | • Pepco’s response to RBL’s Petition violates its duty of candor and is based entirely on unsworn attorney argument like all of Pepco’s filings. • Pepco’s Response was submitted by Pepco Holdings, Inc.’s Assistant General Counsel Dennis Jamouneau. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 35 | 3/19/2026 | Rebecca Levinson Petition for Review | • RBL had to draft a Petition for Review at the last minute to preserve her Constitutional right to due process because OPC ran out the clock before drafting a petition for review that failed to preserve her legal rights and would have destroyed her right to appeal. • RBL knows that the Commission will never review her Petition, so she recorded 6 videos addressed to Ms. Collete Honorable, Exelon’s Chief Legal Officer, Compliance and Corporate Secretary, detailing Pepco’s billing fraud and collusion with the Commission and OPC. • This 6 hour and 6 minute record was recorded on 3/19/2026 (the deadline to file her Petition for Review) and posted on the YouTube channel she had to create to protect her Constitutional right to due process, http://www.youtube.com/@RBLresists. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 34 | 3/9/2026 | Order Denying Requested Relief & Dismissing Complaint | • Order Denying Requested Relief & Dismising Complaint • The Commission’s corrupt Hearing Officer dismissed my Formal Hearing complaint by ignoring reality and rubber stamping Pepco’s unsworn attorney argument. • The Commission, OPC, and Pepco predetermined this result before my Petition for a Formal Hearing was granted on February 24, 2025. • The Pepco/PSC/OPC collusion to deprive me of my Constitutional right of due process was executed with malicious, punative intent to maximize the egregious harm to RBL. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 33 | 3/9/2026 | Order Denying Requested Relief & Dismissing Complaint | • Public version of Order issued by the Commission. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 32 | 1/5/2026 | Pepco’s Reply Brief (Dkt. # 32) | • Pepco’s Reply Brief was submitted after RBL provided notice of its billing fraud directly to the General Counsel of Pepco Holdings, Inc., Anne Bancroft. • Pepco knowingly advanced material misrepresentations of law and fact to deprive RBL of her Constitutional right to due process. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 31 | 12/12/2025 | OPC’s Brief (Dkt. # 31) | • OPC’s Brief calls for the use of a “proxy” method to estimate what Pepco should have billed RBL because Pepco admitted its billing was not based on meter readings & refused to provide any business records to substantiate its billing on RBL’s account. • OPC never discussed its garbage “proxy” method with RBL and intentionally misled her by pretending that it was going to draft a brief that actually advanced her Formal Hearing case.The Commission’s corrupt Hearing Officer declared that RBL was no longer allowed to submit anything on her own behalf at the September 5, 2025 Follow-Up Conference. • OPC intentionally sandbagged RBL’s Formal Hearing after OPC’s Director of Litigation told RBL that it would protect her legal rights at the September 5, 2025 Follow-Up Conference. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 30 | 12/10/2025 | Order Granting OPC’s 2nd Motion for EOT (Dkt. # 30) | • Order granting OPC’s 2nd Motion for Enlargement of Time to file its brief until 12/12/25 with Pepco’s response due 1/5/26. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 29 | 12/5/2025 | OPC’s 2nd Motion for Enlargement of Time (Dkt. # 29) | • OPC’s 2nd Motion for Enlargement of Time • OPC’s Motion alleges the extension was necessary due to “unforeseen medical circumstances.” • OPC was still pretending that it was drafting a brief that protected its client’s legal rights instead of sandbagging RBL for Pepco’s benefit. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 28 | 11/24/2025 | Dkt. No. 28 – Order Granting OPC’s Motion for EOT (Dkt. # 28) | • Order granting OPC’s Motion for Enlargement of Time to file its brief until 12/5/25 with Pepco’s response due 12/31/25. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 27 | 11/14/2025 | Dkt. No. 27 – OPC’s Motion for Enlargement of Time (Dkt. # 27). | • OPC’s1st Motion for Enlargement of Time • OPC’s Motion was specifically drafted to mislead RBL into believing it was drafting a brief that protected her legal rights. • OPC’s Motion states “Since Mr. Antonio’s email [on 9/24/25 ordering RBL to draft a second brief because Pepco suddenly admitted its billing was not based on actual meter readings], Pepco has produced more than a thousand pages of data to be reviewed by the parties in response to OPC’s data requests. On Wednesday, November 5, the parties met virtually to discuss narrow technical questions that have a direct impact on the calculations involved in Ms. Levinson’s complaint. Several follow- up questions remain outstanding.” • On March 16, 2026, OPC finally provided RBL with the documents and information Pepco produced. OPC’s unethical withholding of this highly relevant information that proves Pepco’s billing is fraudulent is extremely prejudicial and violates my Constitutional right to due process. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 26 | 9/5/2025 | Transcript of Follow-Up Conference (Dkt. # 26) | • Transcript of Follow-Up Conference generated by Teams. • The Commission’s corrupt Hearing Officer, Noel Antonio, sent an email to OPC claiming that the Teams recording failed to capture any audio. This is a blatant lie to deprive me due process. • Teams cannot generate a transcript after a meeting without any audio. Mr. Antonio sent RBL a message asking her to officially leave the meeting so that he could prepare the transcript. • Because RBL suspected that PSC and OPC were colluding with Pepco, she recorded the meeting. You can listen to that recording here. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 25 | 8/26/2025 | Order Scheduling Follow-Up Conference (Dkt. # 25) | • Order Scheduling Follow-Up Conference on 9/5/2025 and that there will be an audio recording of the meeting. • The Hearing Officer informed the parties by email that he would not rule on any motions before the Conference. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 24 | 8/20/2025 | OPC’s Notice of Availability (Dkt. # 24) | • OPC’s Notice of Availability. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 23 | 8/15/2025 | OPC’s Motion to Compel Pepco to Respond to Data Request (Dkt. # 22) | • OPC’s Motion to Compel Pepco to Respond to Data Request. • The Hearing Officer denied this motion at the 9/5/2025 Follow-Up Conference. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 22 | 8/15/2025 | OPC’s Notice of Availability (Dkt. # 23) | • OPC’s Notice of Availability. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 21 | 8/13/2025 | Pepco’s Motion to Dismiss Information Request (Dkt. # 21) | • Pepco’s Motion to Dismiss Information Request. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 20 | 8/7/2025 | OPC’s Data Request No. 1 to Pepco (Dkt. # 20) | • OPC’s Data Request No. 1 to Pepco. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 19 | 8/4/2025 | Order Granting OPC’s Motion for Enlargement of Time (Dkt. # 19) | • Order granting OPC request for enlargement of time until 8/15/2025 to schedule follow-up conference. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 18 | 7/25/2025 | OPC’s Motion for Enlargement of Time to Schedule “Follow-Up Conference” (Dkt. # 18) | • OPC claims this EOT was because of Pepco’s 19 MWh billing error in June 2025. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 17 | 6/20/2025 | OPC’s Response to Pepco’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 17) | • OPC told RBL it did not plan to respond to Pepco’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss and was going to wait for the Hearing Officer to decide the case. • OPC only filed a response to stop RBL from filing an ethics complaint with the DC bar against the People’s Counsel, Ms. Mattavous-Frye. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 16 | 6/9/2025 | Pepco’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #16) | • Pepco didn’t respond to any argument in RBL’s Brief and filed a frivolous renewed motion to dismiss falsely claiming that RBL was relying on the energy produced by her solar system. • Pepco admitted that after reviewing RBL’s account again, it “determined there was a 19 kWh diferene between the remediated billing adn her meter reading.” In other words, RBL’s billing wasn’t accurate when Pepco deemed it correct before the Informal Hearing in January 2025. • Pepco claimed “the regulations do not define ‘actual reading’ as the number visible on a meter’s screen, but as the validated data collected and transmitted from the meter.” Pepco didn’t provide a citation because no such regulation exists. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 15 | 5/29/2025 | RBL’s Brief (Dkt. # 15) | • At the Pre-Hearing Conference, the Hearing Officer ordered RBL to file a brief proving what Pepco owed her because Pepco declared the billing errors on her account resoilved. • RBL’s Brief establishes Pepco bears the burden of proof. Pepco is legally obligated to issue bills based on an actual meter reading. It isn’t a customer’s job to prove how much electricity they used. • RBL’s Brief proves that Pepco’s billing doesn’t comply with the legal requirements of the Utility Consumer Bill of Rights and proves numerous unresolved issues raised in RBL’s Formal Hearing Complaint. Pepco refuses to respond to RBL’s Brief. • OPC refuses to explain why it did not prepare a brief and refused to provide any assistance in drafting, filing, or serving RBL’s Brief. At the Follow-Up Confernece on 9/5/24, Pepco Assistant GC Kunle Adeyemo referred to an “agreeement” to consider RBL’s billing estimated. RBL presumes OPC drafted a pro forma brief based on that agreement & the 4/29 “To Whom It May Concern” Letter but did not file after learning that RBL was preparing a brief. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 14 | 5/19/2025 | Order Granting OPC’s 2nd Motion for Extension of Time (Dkt. # 14) | • Order extending deadline for OPC’s “post-prehearing conference” brief from 5/12/2025 to 5/29/2025 with Pepco’s response due 6/9/2025 | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 13 | 5/12/2025 | OPC’s 2nd Motion for Extension of Time to file Brief (Dkt. # 13) | • OPC Motion for EOT to file brief because Pepco had not yet provided data downloaded from probe of RBL’s electric meter on 5/7/24 | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 12 | 4/15/2025 | Order Granting OPC Motion for Extension of Time (Dkt. # 12) | • Order granting Dkt. No. 11. RBL brief due 5/12 & PHI’s response due 5/22. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 11 | 4/14/2025 | OPC’s Motion for Extension of Time to file Brief (Dkt. # 11) | • Motion for EOT to file “post-prehearing conference” because Pepco was not available to “have a separate meeting with Pepco’s technical team and Counsel to discuss more complex data issues” as ordered by Hearing Officer until after 4/18 briefing deadline. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 10 | 4/9/2025 | Pepco’s Updated Exhibit 3B. (Dkt. # 10) | • Pepco Exhibit with daily “Excess Gen” readings from 5/23/2024 through 3/3/2025 calculated using the undisclosed “CStotalRecKwh” formula. • Data from “probe” of Pepco’s meter proves actual meter readings were unlawfully inflated by 150%. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 9 | 4/8/2025 | Pepco’s Updated Exhibit 3A. (Dkt. # 9) | • Pepco Exhibit with daily “Off Grid” readings from 5/23/2024 through 3/3/2025 calculated using the undisclosed “CStotalKwh” formula. • Data from “probe” of Pepco’s meter proves actual meter readings were unlawfully inflated by 150%. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 8 | 4/1/2025 | Order Scheduling Prehearing Conference on 4/8/2025 (Dkt. # 8) | • Order scheduling Prehearing Conference and requiring parties to be prepared to discuss every aspect of RBL’s Complaint, including calculations and documentation in support of the parties’ respective positions. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 7 | 3/25/2025 | Pepco’s Answer & Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 7) | • Pepco’s “Answer” summarily denies all allegations, declares complaint resolved, and moves to dismiss based on false claim that RBL’s Complaint relies on behind-the-meter solar production “inverter” evidence. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 6 | 3/11/2025 | Order Granting Pepco’s Motion for Extension of Time (Dkt. # 6) | • Order extending deadline for Pepco’s Answer to 3/25/25. | [View PUBLIC Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 5 | 3/7/2025 | Pepco Motion for Extension of Tme to file Answer (Dkt. # 5) | • Pepco’s request to extend the deadline to file its Answer by fourteen (14) days. Pepco claimed additional time needed due to length of RBL Formal Hearing Complaint. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 4 | 3/4/2025 | PSC Notice of Assigned Hearing Officer (Dkt. # 4) | • PSC Notice that Attorney Advisor Noel Antonio, Esq. is assigned Hearing Officer. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 3 | 2/27/2025 | OPC Notice of Appearance (Dkt. # 3) | • OPC’s Notice of Appearance of Assistant People’s Counsel Stephen Marencic, Esq. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 2 | 2/25/2025 | PSC Notice to Pepco re Deadline to Answer Formal Complaint (Dkt. # 2) | • PSC Notice to Pepco setting 3/11/2025 deadline for Pepco’s written answer to the allegations in RBL’s Formal Hearing Complaint. | [View UNSEALED Record] | ||
| CC9075277 – 1 | 2/21/2025 | RBL Petition for Formal Hearing (Dkt. # 1) | • RBL Petition for formal hearing & 368-page Formal Hearing Complaint to enforce right to accurate, verifiable Pepco bills based on actual meter readings. • Pepco has not responded to any allegation in RBL’s Formal Hearing Complaint. | [View UNSEALED Record] |