News Stories
Sponsored by Earth Etch. Regulatory insight and compliance solutions for today’s energy markets.
Parties File Initial Comments In Mercantile Customer Rulemaking
As reported previously, Staff of the Ohio Public Utilities Commission issued proposed new rules relating to mercantile customers resulting from recent law changes under HB 15.
In response to these proposed mercantile customer rules parties filed initial comments.
RESA Initial Comments – “First, in its order adopting the rules, the Commission should provide guidance regarding the establishment of the fee for the administrative costs associated with the expedited Standard Service Offer (“SSO”) return provisions. The Commission should direct each electric distribution utility (“EDU”) to file an application for tariff approval (“ATA”) case to establish the fee, with a directive that each EDU identify the steps it took to streamline the process and minimize the administrative costs. In addition, the Commission should consolidate the expedited SSO return provisions. Finally, the Commission should not adopt Staff’s proposal to convert the statutory three-day return process to a ten-day administrative process.”
“Second, the Commission should remove the non-statutory term “generation” from the Staff-Proposed Rule 4901:1-10-36. The statutory language regarding mercantile self-power systems indicates that the EDU can still bill such mercantile customers for transmission and distribution used by the customer. The inclusion of “generation” with nothing else creates unnecessary ambiguity regarding whether the rule is referencing the generation provided behind-the-meter from the mercantile self-power system or the standard billing for retail electric generation service. RESA believes that the better fix is to delete this reference to billing generation from the rule, as there is no dispute that an EDU’s billing for wires service could include the passthrough SSO or generation supply from a shopping customer on a utility consolidated bill. If the Commission intends to retain this reference to generation, then the rule should be revised to clarify that the reference does not include billing the generation from the mercantile self-power system.
Ohio Edison Initial Comments – Expedited Return of Mercantile Customers to Standard Service Offer – “First, the rule references Ohio Adm. Code 4901:1-10-29(H). The Companies are concerned that this reference may cause confusion because Ohio Adm. Code 4901:1-10-29(H)(1) references specified criteria not applicable here.1 Accordingly the Companies recommend the cross citation be changed to “4901:1-10-29(H)(2)” to avoid any confusion.
Second, EDU tariffs frequently include provisions addressing the standard process for customers returning to the standard offer.2 The rule should clarify that in circumstances where the expedited return was noncompliant, the return will be processed in accordance with the EDU’s standard tariff provisions. The Companies’ proposed revisions are provided below: (B) If the certified request does not comply with the requirements set forth in section 4901:1-21-21 of the Administrative Code, the electric utility may process the return to the standard offer pursuant to 4901:1-10-29(H)(2) and the electric utility’s Commission approved tariff.
4901:1-10-36(D) – “This provision provides that “[t]he utility may recover the administrative costs of processing requests under (B) through reasonable fees assessed to the CRES provider as set forth in the electric utility’s tariff and approved by the Commission.”
“The Companies believe this provision should be clarified to address a potential typographical error and to more clearly explain the administrative costs which are to be recovered. First, as proposed, 4901:1-10-36(D) says that the EDU may recover the administrative costs of processing requests under Subsection (B). But Section (B) relates to non-compliant requests to return to the standard service offer. As the Companies understand the proposed rules, non-compliant requests would not be processed as expedited returns, and it is unclear what new or additional costs would need to be recovered. However, there will be costs associated with processing the expedited return anticipated in Section (A), so the Companies submit that this may be a typographical error and that 4901:1-10-36(D) should reference Section (A) instead of Section (B).”
Duke Energy Initial Comments – A. “The Expedited Return Rules Should Clearly Indicate That An Electric Distribution Utility (EDU) Is Not Responsible For Verifying The Contents Of The Mercantile Customer’s Service Agreement Or The Adequacy Of Notice Given By The Supplier To The Customer.”
- “Adequate Time Should Be Allowed For EDUs To Implement The Necessary Bill Cycle Proration Capability In Customer Billing.”
- “The Commission Should Clarify That The “Administrative Costs” Referenced In 4901:1-10-36(D) Include All Incremental Costs Of Implementing Necessary System Changes For Expedited Return Capability.”
- “The Commission Should Modify O.A.C. 4901:1-21-21(B) To Add The EDU As A Recipient Of The Notice Already Proposed To Be Sent To The Customer.”
Note: Attached to the Order is the proposed draft rules. See “order” link below.
Order (11/19/2024)
25-0741-EL-ORD
(In the Matter of the Consideration of Rules Pertaining to Mercantile Customers, as Required by Substitute House Bill Number 15.)
