News Stories

On October 20, 2026 parties filed initial comments on the PUCO’s proposed revisions to Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 4901:1-9 regarding electric metering options.

FirstEnergy utilities support requiring large data centers to cover 100% of line extension and substation costs but requests clarification that substation construction, ownership, and maintenance must follow applicable utility tariffs. FirstEnergy utilities also oppose proposed rate case record-retention requirements, arguing that existing procedures adequately address documentation and cost recovery. Additionally, FirstEnergy utilities oppose requiring itemized line extension cost estimates, citing design and timing constraints, but supports changing the estimate deadline from 10 business days to 14 calendar days.

AEP Ohio recommends modifying the proposed line extension cost estimate requirements by removing the requirement to provide an itemized estimate within 14 calendar days and instead requiring itemization in the binding cost estimate due within 45 calendar days. AEP Ohio argues that site visits, customer discussions, and project design considerations may require additional time to develop accurate itemized estimates. AEP Ohio supports providing an initial good-faith estimate within 14 days while allowing more time for detailed cost calculations.

Duke recommends reducing the retention period for certain accounting records from 50 to 20 years and reconsidering the proposed increase from three to 15 years for customer service applications, citing administrative burdens and customer privacy concerns. Duke also requests modifying proposed rate case record-retention provisions to allow consideration of compliance with existing retention requirements when determining cost disallowances. Additionally, Duke opposes requiring itemized preliminary line extension cost estimates, arguing that detailed cost information may be unavailable before engineering work is completed and could create customer confusion.

Columbia opposes the proposed increase in the record-retention period for executed utility service applications from 3 to 15 years, recommending a 6-year retention period consistent with Ohio’s statute of limitations for contract claims. Columbia also requests clarification that any extended retention requirement applies only to applications executed after the revised rules take effect, noting that older records may have already been destroyed under existing requirements.

OCC recommends prohibiting fees for remote disconnection and reconnection of residential electric service and requiring utilities to submit annual reports demonstrating the reliability improvements and cost savings achieved through customer-funded grid modernization investments. OCC also proposes expanding voluntary time-of-use and other differentiated rate options to all residential smart meter customers and requiring utilities to provide bill-comparison tools. Additionally, OCC supports requiring large data centers to pay 100% of dedicated line extension and substation costs, with safeguards to prevent cost shifting to residential customers and double recovery of infrastructure costs.

AES Ohio generally supports the proposed changes, including increased allowances for non-premium line extension costs, and suggests raising the allowance to $10,000. AES Ohio recommends removing “large” from the proposed definition of large data center to align with existing and proposed utility tariffs. The company also opposes requiring itemized line extension cost estimates within 14 days, recommending that itemization instead be required with the binding estimate due within 45 days. Additionally, AES Ohio proposes that utilities cover 80% of standard line extension construction costs for publicly available EV charging stations, with customers responsible for the remaining 20% plus applicable taxes.