The Commanders want a gas plant at RFK. D.C. law says no, so they're asking for an exemption.

The gas plant question nobody at RFK wants to answer directly

If you live in Hill East, Kingman Park, or anywhere east of the Capitol, the $3.7 billion stadium going up at the old RFK site was supposed to come with a promise: clean energy, no fossil fuels, and a development model that doesn't just replay the city's history of extracting value from Ward 7 and its neighbors. That promise is now under serious pressure, and the clearest signal came not from a press release but from a September 30 oversight hearing at the Wilson Building where Mayor Muriel Bowser's own project manager couldn't keep his story straight.

Reporting by The 51st's Alex Koma on October 15 laid out what happened at that hearing in detail. Brian Hanlon, the head of the D.C. Department of Buildings and Bowser's pick to manage the RFK project, told the D.C. Council: "There is going to be a gap [in the site's power needs], and there is going to be a conversation about how to fill that gap." That gap, it turns out, may be filled with natural gas, in direct conflict with a law Bowser herself signed.

At one point in his testimony, Hanlon said a natural gas plant is "not under consideration" for the project. But he also said the city has included natural gas as a potential power option as it solicited proposals from energy developers. And he revealed that the team is preparing a request for an exemption from D.C.'s 2022 climate law banning natural gas in public buildings.

Council Chairman Phil Mendelson did not take kindly to the evasion. Lawmakers were openly frustrated during the hearing; Mendelson called Hanlon "very unprepared" for these questions.

That is not a minor rebuke from a Council chair known for keeping his temperature low in public.

What the law actually says, and what the Commanders want around it

The team's preliminary design plans suggest that a natural gas-burning power plant could be necessary to fuel the $3.7 billion project. That would run afoul of the sustainability goals and a 2022 law banning the inclusion of such infrastructure in city-backed projects.

The specific statute at issue is the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Amendment Act of 2018 and its subsequent strengthening legislation. D.C. law, as written, prohibits natural gas combustion in new public buildings and city-backed projects. The District has climate commitments that include eliminating all climate pollution by 2045, the D.C. government eliminating climate pollution in its own operations by 2040, and requiring all newly constructed buildings to be free of fossil fuels by 2027.

An exemption request would put Bowser's administration in the position of asking the Council to carve out a formal exception for the city's single largest development project, the same one the mayor used to anchor her legacy during an election year.

The city's energy study will evaluate all options, including solar, geothermal, battery storage, and gas, and is expected to conclude with an RFP for an energy developer in late 2026. That timeline is tight. Under questioning from Mendelson, Hanlon also said Pepco's nearby substation doesn't have enough capacity to fully power the stadium without some sort of on-site energy generation. Councilmembers pressed for transparency and noted that a 26 MW peak demand for the stadium seemed high compared to other new NFL stadiums, which typically require 10 to 12 MW.

Nobody has a clean answer for that gap yet. That is the problem.

This has happened before, and residents remember

The city just went through a similar process with the $515 million project upgrading Capital One Arena, granting the owner of the Wizards and Capitals some exemptions from the same climate law (and refusing to deliver others), and environmentalists are concerned that history could soon repeat itself over at RFK.

Already this year, when D.C. taxpayers gave $515 million to the billionaire whose sports teams play in the Capital One Arena, the executive branch exempted the arena from statutory energy efficiency standards and prohibitions on fossil fuel burning in laws Mayor Bowser herself had signed. Climate advocates warned then that the exemption would be used as a template. The RFK energy situation suggests they were right to worry.

Mark Rodeffer with the Sierra Club testified at the September 30 hearing and put it plainly to WUSA9: "We believe that there are plans in the works to build a gas-fired power plant at the RFK site, in violation of D.C. law. This would pollute the air we breathe."

Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, testified that their efforts to get clarity on what the second energy source would be have been blocked. That opacity, in a project of this size, is its own kind of answer.

Ward 7 residents have heard the sales pitch before

More than 60 people lined up to testify before the D.C. Council on Wednesday over a master plan that would reshape 180 acres along the Anacostia River, and the message from many in the room was blunt: get the parking and displacement pieces right, because the mistakes will be permanent.

The energy question was woven through nearly all of it. Maurice Hall, a Ward 7 resident whose family has lived near the RFK site for 50 years, urged the council to amend the master plan to explicitly prohibit combustion on the campus and commit to cleaner alternatives like solar or geothermal power. He framed it in dollars. "D.C. residents have contributed over a billion dollars to this project. If fossil fuels are allowed to burn on the site, we will have paid to poison our communities, including our parks, homes" and the Anacostia waterfront that the master plan promises to open up.

The plan calls for a lot. On the housing side, it includes 5,500 to 6,500 homes, with at least 30 percent designated as affordable. The plan does not include a new Metrorail station on the site. Instead, it proposes capacity upgrades to the existing Stadium-Armory station along with a new Gold Line bus connection between RFK and Union Station. The District has allocated $300 million for the Stadium-Armory station work, which is expected to be completed by 2030.

Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen went straight at the transit claim during the hearing. Allen noted the plans would result in the stadium operating with five times the number of structured garage parking spaces as Nationals Park. "Anybody who tells you this is a transit-first stadium, just do not buy what they are selling," Allen said.

The Commanders' side offered the standard reply. At a council hearing focused on the team's $50 million community benefits package and stadium subsidy, Kirtan Mehta, the Commanders' chief external affairs officer, said the franchise is "building not just a football stadium, but a neighborhood." Mehta declined to address the energy gap question directly at that session.

The political moment this lands in

Timing is everything here. D.C. is holding a general election for mayor, attorney general, and city council on November 3, 2026. The RFK deal is central to Bowser's legacy argument, and the Democratic mayoral nominee, Janeese Lewis George, has been the most vocal Council critic of the project's environmental terms.

The exemption request, if and when it is formally filed, will land on the desks of a Council that includes several members already uncomfortable with what the stadium deal required them to swallow. Residents living near the proposed redevelopment site fear that the project could accelerate displacement in their communities, drive up property values and rents, and contribute to pollution if fossil fuels are allowed to burn on the campus. Residents and advocates are urging D.C. Council members to demand stronger anti-displacement protections, more robust rail access, and direct clean-energy requirements.

Councilmembers also expressed concern about the gap between stadium opening, projected for 2030, and housing delivery. That gap, stadiums first, homes maybe later, is the same pattern that played out at Nationals Park, where affordable housing promises around the Navy Yard took years longer than the ballpark itself. (Analysis)

The stadium is expected to open in 2030, with groundbreaking beginning in 2026. The energy decision has to come before the concrete does.

What D.C. Residents Should Watch

• The formal exemption request. Hanlon confirmed at the September 30 hearing that the Commanders are preparing an exemption application from D.C.'s 2022 ban on natural gas in city-backed projects. Watch for when it is filed and which agency receives it first.
• The energy RFP, due late 2026. The study evaluating solar, geothermal, battery storage, and gas is expected to produce a request for proposals from energy developers before the end of this year. Whatever options it includes will shape the exemption debate.
• Council Chairman Mendelson's response. Mendelson called Hanlon "very unprepared" at the September 30 hearing. Whether he moves to write an explicit gas prohibition into the master plan legislation is the most consequential near-term question.
• Mayor Bowser's public calendar for October 18 shows a groundbreaking at the National Baptist Memorial Church at 1499 Columbia Rd NW. Her office has not issued a statement on the natural gas exemption question.
• The November 3 election. Whoever wins the mayor's race inherits this decision. Early voting opens October 26 and runs through November 1. The RFK energy terms are not yet locked in.

Sources: The 51st (Alex Koma, Oct. 15, 2026) | WUSA9 | The Washington Sun | Hoodline | D.C. Council hearing record, Sept. 30, 2026 | Sierra Club D.C. | Mayor Bowser public calendar