performance in FY 2015, please review our Annual Report on Form 10-K for FY 2015.

Capitalized terms used in this summary have the meanings given to them in the accompanying proxy statement.

expectations for per share earnings growth over the next five years of between 7% and 10%.

In addition, the Company and its subsidiaries achieved a number of business and operational successes in FY 2015, including entering into a 20-year agreement to provide natural gas to GAIL Global (USA) LNG LLC (a subsidiary of India’s leading natural gas company), acquiring a 7% interest in the Mountain Valley Pipeline project, and continuing to add new solar energy and fuel cell projects to our portfolio. In addition, in FY 2015, our utility subsidiary, Washington Gas, operated safely and continuously during record cold weather in its territories and added over 12,000 new meters.

At the Company’s 2015, 2014 and 2013 annual meetings of shareholders, shareholders had the opportunity to cast an advisory vote regarding our executive compensation program, i.e., a “say-on-pay” vote. The vote results were 83% favorable in 2015, 84% favorable in 2014 and 96% favorable in 2013.

In 2014, we undertook significant shareholder engagement, meeting with eight of our largest institutional shareholders representing in aggregate approximately 29% of our outstanding common stock. The investors with whom we spoke generally did not express concerns about the size of our actual payouts, the structure of our pay practices, the link between pay and performance or our methods for determining market-based compensation targets. Some shareholders suggested that we incorporate a second performance metric in our long-term incentive program to strengthen our ability to attract and retain

talent, and some shareholders requested that we expand our disclosure. Meanwhile, our compensation consultant advised us that the scale of our TSR-based performance plan was stricter than a broad market median, and that our program was more performance-based than market given that it contained no grants of time-based equity awards.

Consistent with investor feedback and the advice of our compensation consultant, for FY 2015 we made changes to our long-term incentive program and we expanded the disclosures in our 2015 proxy statement. Nevertheless, our say-on-pay vote results in 2015 were effectively unchanged from the 2014 vote.

Accordingly, we reexamined and significantly revised our executive compensation program in FY 2015, with most changes effective beginning in FY 2016. These changes are summarized in the table below.

This proxy statement is provided in connection with a solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of WGL Holdings, Inc. to be used at the annual meeting of shareholders to be held on Tuesday, March 1, 2016 at 10:00 a.m., Eastern Time, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof. The annual meeting will be held at 101 Constitution Ave., NW, 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20080. Note that the location of the annual meeting is different than in prior years; additional information about the meeting location is included on the inside back cover of this proxy statement.

This proxy statement is first being provided to our shareholders on or about January 20, 2016. Throughout this proxy statement, “WGL Holdings,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” are intended to refer to WGL Holdings, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless specifically indicated otherwise. In addition, “FY 2012,” “FY 2013,” “FY 2014,” “FY 2015” and “FY 2016” refer to the fiscal years ending September 30 of the year indicated.

You are invited to attend the annual meeting, and we request that you vote on the proposals described in this proxy statement.

You do not need to attend the meeting to vote your shares. If you have received a printed copy of these materials by mail, you may complete, sign and return your proxy card. If you received a printed copy of these materials but prefer to submit your proxy vote over the internet or by telephone, or if you did not receive a printed copy of these materials by mail and are accessing them via the Internet, you may submit your proxy vote via the Internet or by telephone by following the instructions under the heading, “Questions and Answers About the Annual Meeting and Voting” beginning on page 64. In addition, other information about voting is provided later in this proxy statement under the heading, “Questions and Answers About the Annual Meeting and Voting.”

meeting of shareholders. Mr. Beasley was recommended to the Human Resources Committee of the Board (the “HR Committee”) by a third-party search firm. Each nominee will, if elected, serve on the Board until the 2017 annual meeting of shareholders.

All of the nominees for director also currently serve on the board of directors of our natural gas utility subsidiary, Washington Gas Light Company (“Washington Gas”).

The Governance Committee is responsible for identifying director nominees for election to the Board. The Governance Committee may consider nominees suggested by several sources, including outside search firms, incumbent Board members and shareholders.

As provided in its charter, the Governance Committee seeks candidates with experience and abilities relevant to serving as a director of the Company and who will represent the best interests of shareholders as a whole, and not any specific interest group or constituency. The Governance Committee, with input from the Chairman of the Board and other directors, evaluates the qualifications of each director candidate in accordance with the criteria described in the director qualification standards section of our corporate governance guidelines. In evaluating the qualifications of director nominees, the Governance Committee considers factors including, but not limited to, the following:

Commitment. Directors should be able to contribute the time necessary to be actively involved on the Board and its decision-making and should be able and willing to prepare for and attend required meetings.

Diversity. The Board does not have a formal policy regarding the consideration of diversity in identifying nominees for director. Nevertheless, directors should be selected so that the Board is a diverse body. The Board considers the term “diversity” to include differences of viewpoint, professional experience, education, skill and other individual qualities and attributes, as well as differences in race, gender and ethnicity.

Experience. Directors should be or have been in leadership positions in their field of endeavor and have a record of excellence in that field.

Independence. A director should neither have, nor appear to have, a conflict of interest that would impair his or her ability to represent the interests of all the Company’s shareholders and to fulfill the responsibilities of a director.

Integrity. Directors should have a reputation of integrity and be of the highest ethical character.

Judgment. Directors should have the ability to exercise sound business judgment on a wide range of matters.

Knowledge. Directors should have a firm understanding of our operations, business strategy, corporate governance and Board operations.

Skills. Directors should be selected so that the Board has an appropriate mix of skills in core areas such as: accounting, compensation, finance, government relations, law, management, risk oversight and strategic planning.

The Governance Committee and the Board may take into account such other factors as they consider to be relevant to the success of a publicly-traded company operating in the natural gas utility and energy products and services industries. As part of the annual nomination process, the Governance Committee reviews the qualifications of each director nominee, including currently serving Board members, and reports its findings to the Board. On September 22, 2015, the Governance Committee determined that each Board member satisfied the criteria described above and advised the Board that each of the director nominees listed under “Proposal 1 Election of Directors” was qualified to serve on the Board. 

WGL Holdings is committed to maintaining the highest standards of corporate governance, which we believe are essential to sustained success. We have implemented corporate governance practices that we believe promote our goal of maximizing long-term shareholder value. In light of this goal, the Board oversees, counsels and guides management in the long-term interests of the Company and its shareholders. The Board’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to:

•  overseeing the management of our business and the assessment of our business risks;

•  overseeing the processes for maintaining the integrity of our financial statements and other public disclosures, and compliance with law and ethics;

•  reviewing and approving our major financial objectives and strategic and operating plans; and

•  overseeing our talent management and succession planning.

The Board discharges its responsibilities through regularly scheduled meetings, special meetings, actions taken by unanimous written consent and other communications with management as appropriate. Directors are expected to attend all meetings of the Board and of each Board committee on which they serve. During FY 2015, the Board held nine meetings.

The Board has established four standing committees: (i) the Audit Committee; (ii) the Governance Committee, (iii) the HR Committee; and (iv) the Executive Committee. Each of these committees is described in more detail below.

During FY 2015, the Audit Committee held five meetings; the HR Committee held three meetings; and the Governance Committee held four meetings. The Executive Committee did not meet in FY 2015. No director attended fewer than 75% of each of: (1) the total number of meetings of the Board, and (2) the total number of meetings held by all committees of the Board on which he or she served during FY 2015. The Company expects Board members to attend all annual meetings of shareholders at which they are standing for election or re-election as directors but recognizes that, from time to time, other commitments may prevent all directors from attending each annual meeting. All of the directors attended the 2015 annual meeting of shareholders (Mr. Dyke attended telephonically).

The Board has long adhered to governance principles designed to assure excellence in the execution of its duties, and regularly reviews the Company’s governance policies and practices. These principles are outlined in the WGL Holdings corporate governance guidelines, which, in conjunction with our articles of incorporation, bylaws, Board committee charters and related policies, form the framework for the effective governance of WGL Holdings.

The full text of the corporate governance guidelines, the charters for each of the Board committees and the Company’s code of conduct are available on WGL Holdings’ website, www.wglholdings.com, under “Corporate Governance.” These materials are also available in print to any person, without charge, upon written request to:

Assistant Secretary
WGL Holdings, Inc.

101 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20080

Our corporate governance guidelines and bylaws establish a Lead Director of the Board, and designate the Chairman of the Governance Committee to serve in that position. Among other powers and responsibilities, the Lead Director will:

•  preside at all meetings of the Board at which the Chairman of the Board is not present, including executive sessions of the Board;

•  approve information sent to the Board;

•  approve meeting agendas for the Board;

•  approve meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items;

•  have the authority to convene meetings of the independent directors;

•  be available to communicate or meet with any shareholder controlling at least five percent of the outstanding voting stock of the Company; and

•  function as a liaison between the Chairman of the Board and the independent directors, as necessary.

Mr. Barnes served as the Lead Director during FY 2015 and will continue to serve in FY 2016.

The Lead Director presides in executive sessions of the Board at which management is not present. If the executive session includes or is devoted to a report of a Board committee, the Chairman of that committee presides in that portion of the executive session. The Board believes that its leadership structure facilitates proper risk oversight for the Company for a number of reasons, the most significant of which are the following:

•  A combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer role allows for more productive meetings. The Chief Executive Officer is the individual selected by the Board to manage the Company on a day-to-day basis, and his direct involvement in our operations makes him best positioned to lead productive Board strategic planning sessions and to determine the time allocated to each agenda item in discussions of our short and long-term objectives.

•  The Board structure provides strong oversight by independent directors. The Lead Director’s responsibilities include leading executive sessions of the Board during which our independent directors meet without management. These executive sessions allow the Board to review key decisions and discuss matters in a manner that is independent of the Chief Executive Officer, and where necessary, critical of the Chief Executive Officer and senior management.

The Lead Director informs the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, subject to the discretion of the independent directors, about the substance of the discussions that took place during each executive session meeting of the Board. The Board is aware of the potential conflicts that may arise when an executive officer chairs the Board, but believes these potential conflicts are offset by existing safeguards, including: the designation of a Lead Director, regular meetings of the independent directors in executive session, the fact that management compensation is determined by a committee of independent directors who make extensive use of peer benchmarking and the fact that much of our operations are highly regulated.

The Board recognizes that WGL Holdings and its subsidiaries are exposed to certain financial, operational and strategic risks that can affect our earnings and ability to provide value to our shareholders and service to our customers. The Board has delegated certain risk oversight responsibilities to its Audit Committee. In accordance with NYSE requirements and as set forth in its charter, the Audit Committee periodically reviews and discusses our risk management and risk assessment policies with senior management. The Audit Committee incorporates its risk assessment function into its regular reports to the Board. The Audit Committee is directly responsible for overseeing our risk assessment and risk management policies.

At the direction of the Audit Committee and in consultation with the full Board and executive management, the Company created a Risk Management Committee. The Risk Management Committee is comprised of senior members of management, and is chaired by the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company. The Risk Management Committee is responsible for ensuring that the Company is managing its principal enterprise-wide risks. The Risk Management Committee does this by using an enterprise risk management (“ERM”) process which is based on the Company’s risk management policy. The ERM process involves the application

of a well-defined, enterprise-wide methodology that enables our executives to identify, categorize, prioritize, and mitigate the principal risks to the Company such as: business continuity, compliance, credit, environmental, information technology, strategic, financial, operational and reputational risks. In addition to known risks, the ERM process focuses on emerging risks as well as risks that are rare and difficult to predict, but which, if they were to occur, would have a significant impact on the Company. The findings of the ERM process are reported regularly to the Audit Committee by the Chairman of the Risk Management Committee. The Risk Management Committee periodically conducts a full review and update of its assessment of the risks facing the Company and presents the updated assessment to the Audit Committee for its review.

In fulfilling its risk oversight function, the Audit Committee also periodically, and as needed, discusses key risks with the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, the President and Chief Operating Officer, the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, the Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, the Company’s internal auditors, and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. The Board evaluated the risk assessment function as part of its Board evaluation

The Audit Committee members are: George P. Clancy, Jr. (Chairman), Nancy C. Floyd, Debra L. Lee and Dale S. Rosenthal. Members of the Audit Committee are independent under the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and the NYSE Listed Company Manual. The Board has determined that Mr. Clancy, Ms. Floyd, Ms. Lee and Ms. Rosenthal meet the qualifications of an “audit committee financial expert,” as that term is defined by rules of the SEC. As provided in its charter, functions of the Audit Committee include:

•  the appointment, compensation and oversight of independent public accounting firm;

•  reviewing with management and the independent public accounting firm the financial statements and the accompanying report of the independent public accounting firm; and

•  reviewing the system of internal controls and the adequacy of the internal audit program.

The Audit Committee also is directly responsible for overseeing the Company’s risk assessment and risk management policies. The report of the Audit Committee, which appears later in this proxy statement, and the Audit Committee charter provide a further description of the responsibilities of this committee.

General. The HR Committee members are: James F. Lafond, (Chairman), Stephen C. Beasley, George P. Clancy, Jr., James W. Dyke, Jr., and Linda R. Gooden. Members of the HR Committee are independent under the rules of the NYSE Listed Company Manual. The HR Committee discharges the Board’s responsibilities relating to compensation of our executive officers.

As provided in its charter, primary functions of the HR Committee include setting corporate goals and objectives relevant to compensation of the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), evaluating the CEO’s performance and setting the CEO’s compensation based on this evaluation. The HR Committee also recommends compensation levels, sets performance targets and evaluates the performance of our other executive officers and determines any incentive and equity-based compensation to be awarded to those officers. The HR Committee also considers succession planning for the Company’s leadership positions.

Under its charter, the HR Committee may delegate authority to act upon specific matters, within specified parameters, to a subcommittee consisting of one or more members or to

management. Any such delegates are required to report any action to the full HR Committee at its next meeting. Please see the discussion under the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) section for information relating to processes and procedures for the consideration and determination of executive compensation.

Governance. The HR Committee focuses on good governance practices in its operation. In FY 2015, this included, among other practices:

•  reviewing tally sheets prepared by its independent adviser regarding the CEO, Chief Financial Officer and the next three most highly compensated officers (the “Named Executive Officers”). Tally sheets identify the material elements of such executives’ compensation, show the cumulative impact of prior grants of long-term incentive awards, and quantify severance and other payouts to which the executive would be entitled under various employment termination scenarios. The HR Committee concluded, based on the tally sheets, that cumulative pay was reasonable and suggested that no changes be made to our pay philosophy;

•  considering compensation for the executive officers listed in compensation tables of this proxy statement in the context of all of the components of total compensation, and not allowing the sum of the components to exceed market levels of total compensation opportunity;

•  receiving meeting materials several days in advance of meetings;

•  conducting regular executive sessions of HR Committee members; and

•  maintaining direct access to an independent executive compensation adviser.

Compensation Adviser. The HR Committee has the sole authority to retain and terminate any compensation adviser engaged to assist the HR Committee in the evaluation of the compensation of our executive officers and directors. During FY 2015, the HR Committee’s retained adviser was a partner at Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (“Meridian”). Meridian is an independent firm that provides only executive and director compensation advisory services. The HR Committee’s adviser attended two of the three the HR Committee meetings held during FY 2015.

The adviser provided data and information to the HR Committee but did not make recommendations with respect to specific levels of compensation. Services provided by Meridian to the HR Committee for FY 2015 included:

•  development of market data in line with the Company’s compensation philosophy (as discussed in the CD&A section of this proxy statement);

•  pay and performance comparisons;

•  tally sheets;

•  update of the compensation risk review;

•  legislative, regulatory, and market trend updates; and

•  review of the CD&A and other proxy disclosures.

Adviser Independence. The HR Committee concluded that its compensation adviser had no conflicts of interest during FY 2015. In reaching this conclusion, the HR Committee considered all relevant factors, including the six independence factors relating to committee advisers that are specified in Rule 10C-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) and the NYSE’s listing standards. These factors are:

(i)    the provision of other services to the Company by the adviser’s employer;

(ii)    the amount of fees received from the Company by the adviser’s employer as a percentage of the total revenue of the adviser’s employer;

(iii)   the policies and procedures of the adviser’s employer that are designed to prevent conflicts of interest;

(iv)   any business or personal relationship of the adviser with a member of the HR Committee;

(v)    any stock of the Company owned by the adviser; and

(vi)   any business or personal relationship of the adviser or the adviser’s employer with an executive officer of the Company.

In addition, the HR Committee retains the individual adviser as well as the adviser’s firm, and the adviser reports directly to the HR Committee.

The Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving all material transactions with any related person. This obligation is set forth in the Governance Committee charter.

To identify related party transactions, each year we submit and require our directors and officers to complete director and officer questionnaires identifying any transactions with us in which the officer or director or their family members have an interest. We also distribute questionnaires to directors, executive officers and others within the Company to identify related party transactions for purposes of meeting accounting and disclosure requirements under Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 850. We review related party transactions due to the potential for a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest occurs when an individual’s private interest interferes, or

appears to interfere, in any way with the Company’s interests. Our code of conduct requires all directors, officers and employees who may have a potential or apparent conflict of interest to notify their supervisor or the Company’s Compliance Officer.

We expect our directors, officers and employees to act and make decisions that are in the Company’s best interests and we encourage them to avoid situations that present a conflict between our interests and their own personal interests. Our directors, officers and employees are prohibited from taking any action that may make it difficult for them to perform their duties, responsibilities and services to the Company in an objective and fair manner. In addition, we are prohibited from extending personal loans to, or guaranteeing the personal obligations of, any director or officer.

Every other year, the Board evaluates the competitiveness of the Company’s outside director compensation program relative to peer companies. Based on this evaluation, beginning in FY 2015, the Board increased the annual cash retainer fee and eliminated meeting fee payments until after the tenth Board meeting.

The table below presents the FY 2015 cash compensation arrangements for non-employee directors of the Company.

shares of common stock awarded under the plan are immediately vested and non-forfeitable. The Directors’ Stock Plan is unfunded and will expire on March 4, 2020, if not previously terminated by the Board or by shareholders.

The table below presents information regarding the total compensation paid to non-employee directors during FY 2015.

Non-employee directors of the Company are eligible to defer up to 100% of their cash Board compensation under the WGL Holdings and Washington Gas Light Company Deferred Compensation Plan for Outside Directors, as amended and restated (the “Director Deferred Compensation Plan”). This includes the deferral of the payment of annual Board and committee cash retainers, Board and committee meeting fees, and fees for attending director education programs. Deferrals are set at percentage increments of 10%. Interest is earned on deferred amounts, compounded quarterly.

The interest rate on amounts deferred on or after January 1, 2013 is equal to the weighted average interest rate of all of the Company’s outstanding debt because, in any one year, the liability that the Company has to directors is a consolidation of fees deferred over a number of years by directors. Therefore, the funds displace other long-term borrowings that the Company would have otherwise utilized. The interest rate earned on compensation deferred after January 1, 2013 is determined on January 1 each year. The applicable interest rate for calendar year 2016 is 5.08%. The interest rate on amounts that were deferred prior to January 1, 2013 is equal to the weekly average yield to maturity for 10-

year U.S. Government fixed interest rate securities issued at the time of the deferral, with a minimum rate of 8% per year.

Directors may elect to defer distribution of their compensation for a minimum period of one year following the end of the year in which compensation is deferred or until the director’s retirement from the Board. Deferred compensation may be distributed earlier than the time period specified by a director in the event of the director’s retirement, disability, death or upon the occurrence of a severe financial hardship. Directors may elect to receive payment of deferred amounts in a lump sum or in equal annual installments up to a ten-year period. Directors must elect the time and method of distribution at the same time they submit a deferral application. Payments commence within 30 days of the event that triggers payout.

The amount of early withdrawals or accelerated payments made in connection with a severe financial hardship is limited in accordance with applicable tax laws. The administrator of the Director Deferred Compensation Plan has the sole discretion to determine whether such an early withdrawal or accelerated payment in the event of a severe financial hardship will be permitted.

nominees and executive officers as a group. Each of the individuals listed, as well as all directors and executive officers as a group, beneficially owned less than 1% of the Company’s outstanding common stock.

shares, and one report on Form 4 was filed late for Douglas A. Staebler, Senior Vice President of Washington Gas, relating to two sales transactions on a single day totaling 1,200 shares. In addition, one report was not filed in FY 2014 for Vincent L. Ammann, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, relating to three family gift transactions on a single day.

Our executive compensation program is market-based, performance-oriented and reasonable, as evidenced by the following:

•  Our pay philosophy is conservative, both before and after giving effect to program changes implemented for FY 2016.

o We have no employment contracts with executives and no guaranteed pay other than base salary.

o Each component of our program is targeted at the size-adjusted 50th percentile of the utilities marketplace. Use of a utilities market rather than general industry results in lower market benchmarks.

o The HR Committee’s consultant size-adjusts the market data to be appropriate based on our revenues relative to the total compensation peer group. The market capitalizations of peers do not impact the market data we develop for use in pay decisions.

o Executive perquisites are few and have low value.

•  Our actual pay opportunities are moderate and are aligned with our utility peers.

o Our FY 2015 target total compensation opportunities for Named Executive Officers were within 1% of market in the aggregate.

o We take retirement benefits into account when comparing target total compensation to the size-adjusted 50th percentile. That is, if retirement benefits are above-market, we reduce long-term incentive opportunities to offset them.

•  Our short-term incentive (“STI”) program has had moderate actual payouts and is regarded favorably by our regulators.

o The plan pays a maximum of 150% of target.

o The factor that relates to the Company’s performance, which we refer to as the Corporate Factor, was 130% of target for FY 2015 and has averaged 108.3% of target for the past three fiscal years.

o Our design, which uses 15 performance measures, achieves favorable regulatory treatment due to its high customer orientation by focusing on the delivery of safe, reliable and reasonably priced natural gas service. We believe that favorable regulatory treatment reflects the fact that our plan adds value for all of our stakeholders, including shareholders.

•  Our long-term incentive (“LTI”) plan is entirely performance-based and has paid zero or below target for three of the past four periods.

o Our performance share and performance unit payouts depend on how our 3-year total shareholder return (“TSR”) compares to that of utilities deemed most like us. The measure is intended to be a proof of our business strategy and our execution of it.

o The value to our employees of vesting performance shares increases or decreases in direct proportion to the appreciation or depreciation of our shares over the performance period.

o We have not granted solely time-based restricted stock since 1996 or stock options since 2006.

At the Company’s 2015, 2014 and 2013 annual meetings, shareholders had the opportunity to cast an advisory vote regarding our executive compensation program, i.e., a “say-on-pay” vote. The vote results were 83% favorable in 2015, 84% favorable in 2014 and 96% favorable in 2013.

In 2014, we met with eight of our largest institutional shareholders representing in aggregate approximately 29% of our outstanding common stock in order to better understand the decrease in our 2014 say-on-pay vote results compared to 2013. The investors with whom we spoke generally did not express concerns about the size of our actual payouts, the structure of our pay practices, the link between pay and performance or our methods for determining market-based compensation targets. Some shareholders suggested that we incorporate a second performance metric in our long-term incentive program to strengthen our ability to attract and retain talent, and some shareholders requested that we expand our disclosure. Meanwhile, our compensation consultant advised us

that the scale of our TSR-based performance plan was stricter than a broad market median, and that our program was more performance-based than market given that it contained no grants of time-based equity awards.

For those reasons, for FY 2015 we made a change to our long-term incentive program. To match the median design of TSR-based performance plans at S&P 500 companies, we changed the lowest TSR percentile at which payouts could be made from 30th percentile to 25th percentile. We then added a dividend growth standard that applies if TSR is below the 25th percentile, which, if met, will result in a payout of 25% of target. In addition, we expanded the disclosures in our proxy statement regarding the link between our STI performance metrics and our long-term strategic goals, the evaluation of our annual corporate scorecard results for the purpose of determining STI payouts and our selection of the total compensation peer group and the long-term incentive peer group.

are summarized in the table below. Note that, with the exception of the information set forth in this sub-section or as specifically noted, this CD&A discusses only our executive compensation program for FY 2015.

•  WGL Holdings generated record operating earnings* for FY 2015 of $158.2 million, an improvement of $19.2 million over operating earnings of $139.0 million for FY 2014, and reported net income applicable to common stock of $131.3 million for FY 2015, compared to $105.9 million for FY 2014.

•  WGL Holdings established 22 new stock intra-day trading highs during the fiscal year.

•  WGL Holdings increased its annual dividend by nine cents, a 5% increase, to $1.85 per share. This marks the 39th consecutive year that the Company has increased the dividend on its common stock.

•  In March 2015, WGL Holdings communicated expectations for growth in operating earnings per share* over the next five years of between 7% and 10%. This growth is expected to be balanced across the Company’s business segments and is expected to be driven by energy infrastructure investments that will generate predictable revenue streams. Operating earnings per share increased by $0.48 per share from $2.68 in FY 2014 to $3.16 in FY 2015, an increase of 17.9%. Net income per share increased from $2.05 to $2.62.

•  WGL Holdings’ wholly-owned subsidiary, WGL Midstream, entered into an agreement to sell up to 430,000 Dth/day of natural gas over 20 years to GAIL Global (USA) LNG LLC (a subsidiary of GAIL (India) Limited), India’s leading Natural Gas company), commencing with the in-service date of the Cove Point LNG export facility.

•  WGL Midstream acquired a 7% interest in the Mountain Valley Pipeline project, a 300-mile long pipeline that is expected to

have a capacity of 2 Bcf/day and that will move gas from the Marcellus and Utica shale plays to markets in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic regions. WGL Midstream will also be a shipper on the pipeline and will purchase a significant amount of natural gas as part of the agreement.

•  WGL Holdings entered into multi-million dollar agreements related to renewable energy in FY 2015, continuing to add new solar energy and fuel cell projects to its portfolio. As of September 30, 2015, WGL Holdings’ portfolio consists of over 104 megawatts of installed solar capacity and 4 megawatts of installed fuel cell capacity. An additional 40 megawatts of distributed generation is currently under contract or in construction.

•  Washington Gas experienced record cold weather in its territories, recording seven of its top 25 days of gas send-out in FY 2015 and achieving record single day send-out of 1.672 million dekatherms on February 19, 2015. The Washington Gas distribution system operated safely and continuously during these extreme conditions.

•  Washington Gas added over 12,000 new meters within its service territory, which we believe demonstrates the Company’s successful marketing and sales efforts.

•  Company employees and their families volunteered more than 12,800 hours of their time to a variety of community service projects in the Washington DC metropolitan area.

•  WGL Holdings is on track to achieve its 2020 goals to reduce fleet and facility emissions by 70 percent (compared to 2008) and to decrease emissions by 18 percent (measured from a 2008 baseline) for each therm of gas delivered.

Our executive compensation program is intended to achieve the following fundamental objectives:

•  attract and retain qualified executives;

•  focus executives’ attention on specific strategic and operating objectives of WGL Holdings;

•  align executives’ interests with the long-term interests of WGL Holdings’ shareholders; and

•  align management’s interests with the customers of its regulated utility subsidiary (Washington Gas) by rewarding the provision of a safe and reliable gas supply to customers at a

reasonable cost, and align management’s interests with the customers of its non-utility entities and the communities in which we operate.

To accomplish these objectives, the HR Committee provides the Named Executive Officers competitive total compensation opportunities based on the size-adjusted 50th percentile of the range of compensation paid by similar utility industry companies for positions of similar responsibility. Actual pay reflects WGL Holdings’ short and long-term performance and each individual’s performance.

For FY 2015, our compensation program for our executive officers, including the Named Executive Officers, consisted of several compensation elements, each of which is discussed in more detail below. Each element of the executive compensation program is structured to help achieve one or more of the compensation objectives described above. Decisions with respect to one element of pay generally do not impact other elements of pay, with the exception that above-market retirement benefits reduce LTI opportunities so that total target compensation remains near market compensation.

A significant percentage of total compensation is allocated to incentives, both short-term and long-term. Short-term

incentives focus on internal performance measures and goals that we set each year, and are paid in cash. Long-term incentives focus on our TSR relative to our peers and are denominated in and paid in a combination of stock and cash.

There is no pre-established policy or target for the allocation between cash and non-cash compensation or between short-term and long-term compensation. Rather, the HR Committee uses market data and its business judgment to determine the appropriate level and mix of incentive compensation.

The HR Committee uses specific analytic tools and its seasoned business judgment to form recommendations and decisions regarding executive compensation matters. To facilitate the HR Committee’s decision-making process for FY 2015, the HR Committee’s independent executive compensation adviser, a partner at Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (“Meridian” or “the adviser”) prepared an executive compensation market study including a comparison of our retirement benefits to market, compensation tally sheets for each executive, pay and performance comparisons, an incentives risk evaluation and information on executive compensation trends. These materials were delivered to the HR Committee members in advance of HR Committee meetings and were the subject of discussion between HR Committee members and the adviser.

In addition, the HR Committee received and considered comprehensive reports from management on corporate and individual executive performance. Corporate performance was discussed with the HR Committee at the time that our financial results for FY 2015 were being released to the public. The HR Committee considered our corporate performance as measured

by our reported financial results for FY 2015 and by the corporate scorecard for FY 2015.

Although specific weightings were not assigned in advance to each corporate scorecard goal for FY 2015, the HR Committee decided that it was appropriate to apply the methodology and weightings that it approved for FY 2016 to evaluate corporate performance for FY 2015. Thus, the FY 2016 methodology that was approved by the HR Committee was effectively implemented a year early. There were 15 items on the corporate scorecard for FY 2015. Details regarding the targets and results for our corporate scorecard are reported elsewhere in this CD&A.

Individual performance of our Named Executive Officers is measured each year by the HR Committee and our management. Several specific individual performance factors, described elsewhere in this proxy statement, were considered by the HR Committee. The HR Committee members also have direct knowledge of the performance of several of the executives through regular and special reports by these executives to the Board and Board committees. Our Chairman and CEO discusses the performance of our other executives in detail with the HR Committee.

Our philosophy is to provide pay opportunities for each component of pay and for total compensation at the size-adjusted 50th percentile of the utilities market. During FY 2014, in support of compensation decisions for FY 2015, the adviser collected and analyzed comprehensive market data on base salary, short and long-term incentives, and the sum of those components. The adviser separately analyzed the market competitiveness of our executive retirement benefits and the prevalence of perquisites.

To develop market information for our executive officers, including the Named Executive Officers, the adviser determined compensation opportunities for comparable positions at comparable companies of comparable revenue size, using statistical techniques to adjust the market data to be appropriate for our particular revenue size. The adviser used all relevant available data for comparable positions in the total compensation peer group. The relative market capitalizations of the Company and our peers do not impact the development of the market benchmarks, given that the adviser uses regression analysis based on revenues to size-adjust the data. The elements of pay were benchmarked both individually and in total to the same peer companies.

The total compensation peer group used in the market study that supported our FY 2015 pay decisions is shown below. The list is subject to change each year depending on the availability of the companies’ data through the Aon Hewitt Total Compensation Measurement database (used by the adviser for FY 2015), and the continued appropriateness of the companies. All companies were chosen because they are utility companies in a size range reasonably near WGL Holdings. While we periodically review market data of general industry companies, which is generally higher than that of utilities, these data historically have not impacted our actual pay levels or practices.

The total compensation peer group is not the same as the long-term incentive peer group described on page 34. The total compensation peer group is intended to benchmark the market compensation for executives in comparable positions and is constrained by the availability of data in the compensation database used. In contrast, the long-term incentive peer group is selected to benchmark share performance as measured by TSR for comparable investment opportunities and is not constrained by database participation.

Target pay levels of the Named Executive Officers and our other executive officers in FY 2015 and in prior years were set at a level approximately equal to the size-adjusted 50th percentile of the utility market for officers of similar experience and responsibility. The HR Committee utilized comprehensive executive compensation data provided by its adviser to determine these market levels, which were then used to establish compensation levels for all of our officers. This approach places base salaries at overall market rates for base pay, and creates the opportunity for each officer to achieve, exceed or fall short of total target compensation through incentive pay. This continuing practice is designed to provide an incentive to achieve higher levels of performance by the officers. We believe this practice also aligns the interests of the officers of WGL Holdings and Washington Gas with the interests of shareholders, customers and the communities in which our businesses operate.

The market data demonstrated a higher level of base pay and incentive opportunities for the Chairman and CEO position as compared to other executive officers. Therefore, the HR Committee granted Mr. McCallister higher levels of target pay than other officers.

Mr. McCallister, our Chairman and CEO, made specific recommendations for FY 2015 salary adjustments for all officers except himself, considering the data provided by the HR Committee’s adviser on industry compensation levels, the scope of each Named Executive Officer’s role, and the Named Executive Officer’s sustained individual performance, results and time in position. These recommendations were presented to the HR Committee for discussion and recommendation to the Board

at the September 19, 2014 HR Committee meeting and were effective October 1, 2014.

The HR Committee met with its adviser in executive session at that meeting to consider Mr. McCallister’s base salary and target incentives for FY 2015, which it has sole authority to approve. In September 2014, the HR Committee increased Mr. McCallister’s base salary by $24,000 (3.0%), with no increase to STI or LTI percentage opportunities.

FY 2015 target pay opportunities for all executive officers were established based on considerations of market data and internal pay equity – that is, the relationship of target award opportunities of the Named Executive Officers with those of other officers at the same level in the Company. As a result of these changes, target pay opportunities for the Named Executive Officers ranged from -9% to +10% compared to market, after including the retirement benefits available to each Named Executive Officer. For all Named Executive Officers, above-market retirement benefits served to decrease the LTI grants made, in order to be at or below market for all compensation elements.

The base salary that was paid to each Named Executive Officer for FY 2015 is the amount reported for such officer in column (c) of the Summary Compensation Table that appears later in this proxy statement. STI target opportunities and the target payout for performance units under the LTI program are reflected in column (d) of the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table that appears later in this proxy statement, and target payouts for performance shares under the LTI program (denominated in the number of shares to be issued) are reflected in column (g) of the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table.

The amounts listed in columns (c), (d) and (e) of the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table in this proxy statement show the potential range of STI cash awards for FY 2015 for each Named Executive Officer.

Notwithstanding the above, payment of any STI for FY 2015 was conditioned upon the Company exceeding a threshold for consolidated non-GAAP return on equity for the year. The Company determined consolidated non-GAAP return on equity by adjusting GAAP net income for certain operating earnings and/or losses (non-GAAP adjustments). This amount was then divided

by average GAAP equity, as adjusted for items included as non-GAAP adjustments. The non-GAAP return on equity goal was established by the HR Committee at the beginning of the fiscal year in relation to the expected earnings forecast for that year.

At its September 19, 2014 meeting, the HR Committee set FY 2015 target STI award opportunities for each Named Executive Officer at or near the size-adjusted 50th percentile of the market data provided by the HR Committee’s adviser. It also approved FY 2015 performance goals and targets that governed payout under the plan.

The corporate performance goals making up our FY 2015 corporate scorecard recognize that shareholders in a regulated utility achieve their investing objectives when customers are well-served through efficient operations. The Company’s FY 2015 performance goals included multiple metrics in eight corporate performance categories related to: rewarding investors, safe delivery, customer value, performance improvement, supplier diversity, sustainability, employer of choice and reliable supply.

As noted above, for FY 2016, the HR Committee approved a formulaic calculation, involving the assignment of specific

In most cases, the indicative corporate factor will be the Corporate Factor. However, the HR Committee retains discretion to reduce the Corporate Factor (including to set the Corporate Factor at zero) as it deems appropriate. The HR Committee might exercise this negative discretion, for example, if the Company’s financial performance for the fiscal year was significantly below expectations or if the Company’s performance was otherwise substantially below expectations in a way that was not adequately reflected by the application of this methodology.

The corporate scorecard goals measure the results of short-term activities that drive the long-term strategic objectives of the Company. The performance targets are intended to challenge the Company and its executive officers to achieve significant accomplishments in each of these areas. Set forth below are the FY 2015 performance goals and a brief discussion of the relationship between each goal and stockholder interests.

Reward Investors. This category includes a goal for utility return on equity (“ROE”) and a goal for non-utility earnings. Our utility ROE performance goal measures the ability of our natural gas utility business to earn the weighted average ROE allowed by our three regulatory commissions in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. Non-utility earnings is a measure of the ability of WGL Holdings to deliver earnings against our goals through non-utility activities. Both allowed utility ROE and non-utility earnings are measured on a non-GAAP basis.

Safe Delivery. This category includes an Employee Work Safety goal and a System Safety/Pipeline Integrity goal. The safe delivery of natural gas is fundamental to our business, is an essential foundation for sustainable success, and reflects our safety culture. Low employee injury rates reduce our costs due to injury (medical, worker’s compensation and costs associated with backfilling vacancies) and increases our employees’ availability for work. In addition, lower injury levels improve overall health and well-being, bolstering employee morale and retention. Our focus on system safety and pipeline integrity measures enables us to maximize the return on our system investments by (i) limiting emergency repairs and remediation, (ii) ensuring the system’s ability to serve existing customers reliably and meet the demands of meter growth, (iii) achieving favorable regulatory treatment, (iv) limiting liability and (v) helping to ensure that investments in our pipeline, such as investments in our accelerated pipe replacement programs, are eligible for regulatory cost recovery.

Customer Value. This category includes a “customer satisfaction” goal, a “new meter additions” goal, a customer engagement initiative goal and a customer information system goal. Customer satisfaction, based on surveys of customers who have interacted with us during the year, is a key measure of our success in delivering core services to our customers, and is

critical to achieving positive regulatory treatment and growing our customer base. New meter growth is one of the principal drivers of revenue opportunity for our natural gas utility business. Our customer engagement initiative measures our success in building the marketing and sales capability required for us to compete effectively and to grow the WGL portfolio over the long term. Our customer information system (“CIS”) goal measures our success in implementing our new customer service and billing system, which includes mobile dispatch capability, on time and on budget. We expect the new system to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our customer service operations and provide a platform for customer growth.

Performance Improvement. This category includes a goal relating to construction unit cost attainment and a goal relating to operation and maintenance (“O&M”) cost per customer. Construction unit cost attainment ensures that we are efficiently managing the direct costs of our construction projects. Managing our O&M cost per customer helps to ensure the efficiency of our operations as we maintain and grow the number of active customer meters.

Supplier Diversity. We have set significant goals to increase our spending with diverse-owned businesses. By supporting expanded opportunities for minority and women owned businesses, we increase competition and vendor options in the marketplace, which benefits the Company and the communities that we serve. These goals are consistent with commitments we have made to our regulators and demonstrate our continued commitment to promoting diversity.

Sustainability. This metric tracks our progress in achieving our 2020 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals and creating a culture and corporate processes that support their achievement. We believe this goal demonstrates our commitment to being a leading provider of clean energy solutions to our customers and reinforces our WGL Energy Answers brand position.

Employer of Choice. This category includes an employee engagement goal and a community involvement goal. We believe a high level of employee engagement improves employee performance, morale and retention, which lead to higher levels of customer satisfaction and, ultimately, to financial success. Our community involvement goal helps to ensure that our employees are connected to the communities they serve and improves customer relationships and loyalty.

Reliable Supply. Our system outage rate is a key performance metric for our utility operations. Low outage levels are fundamental to our business, and are essential to high customer satisfaction, favorable regulatory treatment and our ability to grow and create new revenue opportunities.

Named Executive Officers had individual goals for FY 2015 which encompassed:

•  their contributions to meeting established corporate and departmental goals;

•  managing resources within established departmental budgets; and

•  effectiveness in areas of leadership, planning and teamwork.

After a comprehensive performance appraisal of each Named Executive Officer and a review of their individual achievements, contributions to the corporate scorecard results and personal effectiveness in leading their respective areas of responsibility, Mr. McCallister recommended an Individual Factor specific to each Named Executive Officer except for himself. The HR Committee discussed and approved the Individual Factors recommended by the CEO for these Named Executive Officers. In executive session, the HR Committee developed an Individual Factor of 1.5 for Mr. McCallister. The other Named Executive Officers received the following Individual Factors: Chapman: 1.4, Ammann: 1.3, Chandra: 1.3, and Thornton: 1.3.

Mr. McCallister’s Individual Factor reflects achievement of 12 of 15 goals on the corporate scorecard, including a TSR that led all companies in our long-term incentive peer group in FY 2015, the

The LTI program is designed to reward our senior executives for our performance for shareholders relative to comparable investments in other utilities. For FY 2015, it granted performance shares and performance units in a 50%-50% ratio. We choose to provide long-term incentive opportunities to achieve the following goals:

Align executives’ interests with shareholder interests. Performance share and performance unit payouts for FY 2015 were dependent on WGL Holdings common stock performance – including stock price appreciation and dividends – compared to peer companies. In addition, performance share awards rise and fall in value with the price of our common stock during the performance period.

Match market practice. Our plan design is typical of the plan designs of the regulated utility companies in our total compensation peer group, although our program overall is more performance-based than is typical.

Promote common stock ownership. Payout of earned performance share awards is made in common stock.

Encourage retention. Vesting provisions in the performance share and performance unit programs provide an incentive for executives to stay with us and to focus on the long-term interests of the Company, its shareholders and customers.

Performance share awards are denominated and are paid out in shares of WGL Holdings common stock. Performance unit awards are denominated in dollars and are paid out in cash. In all other respects, the two awards were the same for FY 2015.

Performance shares and performance units granted in FY 2015 will be paid out at the end of the performance period if certain long-term performance criteria are achieved and the Named Executive Officer remains an employee. If the Named Executive Officer leaves the Company before the performance period has ended, he or she will forfeit any payouts for the performance period. Upon retirement, death or disability, however, the HR Committee has discretion to prorate awards based on the number of months worked in the performance period.

The HR Committee chose companies to include in the long-term incentive peer group based on the following criteria:

•  Classification as an energy related company under the Standard Industrialization Classification codes;

•  Public equity ownership and headquarters in the United States;

•  Annual net revenues greater than $175 million;

•  At least 70% of assets related to U.S. natural gas distribution;

•  No significant exploration and production or electric generation assets;

•  No significant energy trading operations;

•  An investment grade credit rating by Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s; and

•  No announced merger plans.

Companies that meet most, but not all, of the above criteria were considered and included in the long-term incentive peer group if deemed to be comparable based on other market indicators.

The long-term incentive peer group is not the same as the total compensation peer group discussed on page 27. The total compensation peer group is intended to benchmark market compensation for executives in comparable positions and is constrained by the availability of data in the compensation database used. In contrast, the long-term incentive peer group is selected to benchmark share performance as measured by TSR for comparable investment opportunities and is not constrained by database participation.

The payout of performance share and performance unit grants made in FY 2015 and in FY 2014 will be based on our TSR performance during the FY 2015-2017 and FY 2014-2016 performance periods, respectively, compared to our long-term incentive peer groups for each grant year.

Performance share and performance unit grants made in FY 2013 vested and were paid out October 2, 2015 based on our TSR performance during the FY 2013-2015 performance period compared to our long-term incentive peer group for the FY 2013 grants. For this performance period, WGL Holdings’ TSR ranked

fifth out of 17 companies in our long-term incentive peer group, or approximately the 76th percentile, resulting in a payout for performance share and performance unit grants at 166.2% of target.

The chart below reflects the peer companies that were included in the long-term incentive peer groups for the performance periods indicated, as approved by the HR Committee. The FY 2015-2017 peer companies listed below were approved at the HR Committee’s September 19, 2014 meeting based on the criteria described under the heading, “Long-Term Incentive Peer Group Selection.”

Named Executive Officer, they do not reflect how the Company’s TSR over the three-year vesting period will impact the actual payout. The individual may be compensated considerably more or less based on how well the Company’s TSR performs against the long-term incentive peer group.

The tables and graph below outline the aggregate realized LTI earned payouts for the performance periods ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 in contrast to the target long-term award values for the same periods. This table illustrates the pay for performance nature of our executive compensation program.