News Stories

In response to the Ohio Commission’s  September 30, 2026 order directing all interested persons or entities wishing to file comments or reply comments regarding the review of Ohio Adm. Code Chapter 4901:1-9, metering options.

After stakeholder workshop feedback Staff recommended that Ohio Adm.Code 4901:1-9- 03, 4901:1-9-05, and 4901:1-9-09 continue without change. However, Staff proposes changes to Ohio Adm.Code 4901:1-9-01 and 4901:1-9-06-07. The proposed amendments add a definition of large data center; prescribe guidance for line extensions for large data center customers; update customer responsibility limits applicable to non-premium line extension costs; modernize and clarify the records-retention schedule; expand the general instructions; address overlapping Commission retention periods; permit flexible record-storage media subject to safeguards, transfer verification, and access requirements; add retention protections for rate proceedings, pending litigation or governmental proceedings, and collection of prior customer debt; revise selected retention periods; simplify obsolete media specific requirements; and remove specified production-record schedules for electric, gas, and nuclear operations.

Attached to this Entry are the proposed rules (Attachment A).

As background, on February 12, 2026, the Commission initiated its review of Ohio Adm.Code Chapter 4901:1-9 and scheduled a stakeholder workshop for March 26, 2026. The workshop was held as scheduled, and interested stakeholders were afforded an opportunity to provide comments and recommendations concerning the rules.

AES Ohio – “AES Ohio generally does not oppose Staff’s recommended revisions to Ohio Adm.Code Chapter 4901:1-9.”

“The Company, however, proposes to remove the qualifier “large” in the definition of “large data center” in proposed Ohio Adm.Code 4901:1-9-01(A)(10). In the July 23, 2025 Finding and Order in Case No. 24-508-EL-ATA, which approved Ohio Power Company’s Data Center Tariff, the Commission adopted the same definition for “Data Center” used in proposed Ohio Adm.Code 4901:1-9-01(A)(10) without the “large” qualifier. The same definition is likewise used for “Data Center” in AES Ohio’s proposed Data Center Tariff in the pending July 21, 2026 Stipulation and Recommendation in Case No. 25-958-EL-AIR. AES Ohio urges the Commission to maintain consistent terms to avoid confusion and ensure similar treatment for similar customers.”

“Finally, pursuant to the April 10, 2023 Stipulation and Recommendation in Case No. 22- 900-EL-SSO, AES Ohio urges the Commission to adopt a policy that for non-residential customers, electric utilities be responsible for 80% of all standard construction costs of line extensions for publicly available EVSE, with the customer responsible for the remaining 20% of the project cost, plus applicable tax. Modifying the CIAC ratio in the manner will encourage investment in publicly available EV charging infrastructure across the state and is in the public interest.”

OCC – “Ohio consumers have been made to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for grid modernization, including advanced metering infrastructure (“AMI”) – and they will pay hundreds of millions more. . . . But one fact is certain – disconnections are increasing as smart meters allow utilities to disconnect residential consumers’ electric service with the flip of a switch at minimal cost. This must stop.”

“Also of concern is the lack of data available to assess the success of AMI investments from a reliability and reduced O&M perspective. Residential consumers deserve to know whether grid modernization investments (including AMI investments), which they are being charged hundreds of millions of dollars for, are benefitting them through improved service reliability and lower costs. . . And yet some utilities continue to charge consumers disconnection and reconnection fees that fail to reflect the substantially diminished costs of these services that can be accomplished remotely. This must stop.”

“PUCO should extend voluntary time-differentiated pricing options beyond electric heated homes to all residential consumers and require utilities to provide tools to help consumers compare their electric bills under available rates. Finally, OCC supports the PUCO Staff’s proposed definition of “large data center and the proposed amendments requiring large data centers to pay the costs they cause.”

Ohio Edison – “The Companies support the changes in subsections (a) and (b) that would require large data centers to pay 100% of their line extension, premium service, and substation construction costs. However, the additional proposed changes in subsection (b) would create a potential inconsistency with the Companies’ tariffs. Specifically, (b) presumes that a customer has the option to build and own their own substation. Under some of the Companies’ rate schedules, large data center customers would be required to build, own, and maintain their substations”

Long Extension Cost Estimates – “This section includes a proposed change that would require the nonbinding good faith cost estimate for line extension projects to be itemized. The Companies respectfully request that this change not be adopted. To provide an itemized line extension cost estimate, the Companies would have to essentially complete the project’s design, which is not feasible in 14 days.”

Ohio Power –  “Ohio Power recommends removing the proposed change to OAC 4901:1-9-07(C)(1) requiring electric utilities to provide an itemized cost estimate to customers for line extension projects within 14 calendar days and moving it to OAC 4901:1-9-07(C)(2).”