|
|
|
|
|
AEP Ohio to Ignore Order for Greater Discounted Capacity Absent Further Direction from PUCO
January 26, 2012
Email This Story
Copyright 2010-
AEP Ohio said that it would not file a new version of the Detailed Implementation Plan concerning the allocation of discounted capacity to customers absent further direction from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, or the case's attorney examiners, notwithstanding PUCO's recent entry requiring AEP Ohio to file a revised Detailed Implementation Plan.
As first reported by Matters, PUCO on January 23 clarified its order modifying the AEP Ohio electric security plan to, among other things, specify that discounted capacity provided to opt-out aggregations is "separate" from the capped discounted capacity allocations set forth in the stipulation, and to specify that no re-allocation of unused RPM-priced capacity allotments is to occur among customer classes, both before and after January 1, 2012.
Seeking an expedited ruling, AEP Ohio has requested "clarification" from PUCO that the filing of any new Revised Detailed Implementation Plan for the discounted capacity would not be required until after a rehearing decision is issued, as AEP Ohio stated its intent to seek rehearing of PUCO's January 23 entry concerning the availability of RPM-priced capacity.
No ruling had been issued as of press time.
AEP Ohio claims that the January 23 PUCO entry goes beyond clarification of the prior electric security plan order and impermissibly, "adopts additional modifications to the Stipulation and discloses new and different interpretations of the Opinion and Order that have a material and adverse impact on AEP Ohio."
Despite AEP Ohio's request for a ruling sanctioning its action, AEP Ohio said that, "Absent further direction from the Attorney Examiners or the Commission, AEP Ohio plans to await ruling on this motion prior to filing a new version of the Revised DIP."
AEP Ohio noted that PUCO's January 23 entry requiring a new Revised Detailed Implementation Plan (DIP) did not include a specific deadline.
"The DIP is not like a rate or tariff to be implemented upon issuance of an Opinion and Order and remain in effect during the rehearing process. Rather, as referenced above, the primary disputes for rehearing in this regard relate to the accommodation for governmental aggregation adopted in the Opinion and Order and to future administration of the set-aside levels. The disputed matters will be implemented in the future - after issuance of the rehearing decision - and do not present an immediate impact or require an immediate resolution. In other words, these matters can be sorted out on rehearing prior to the time they need to be implemented," AEP Ohio claimed.
However, one of the interpretations in PUCO's January 23 entry which AEP Ohio is contesting is PUCO's finding that, notwithstanding the re-allocation of unused discounted capacity allotments (from the under-subscribed residential and industrial classes to the over-subscribed commercial class) which AEP Ohio performed prior to January 1, 2012, no customer class at any time, including for the period before January 1, 2012, shall have its allotments of discounted capacity re-allocated to another class.
While, as December 16, 2011, which is the most recent data on AEP Ohio's website, there was still significant room under the residential discounted capacity cap despite the re-allocation of residential cap space to the commercial class, the industrial cap was nearly fully subscribed, and by now, may be fully subscribed. Therefore, immediate compliance with PUCO's January 23 entry, which would restore an amount of discounted capacity allotments to the industrial class, may allow industrial customers who had previously been denied discounted capacity a new opportunity to receive an allotment under the expanded allotments made available.
This is to say, there is certainly an "immediate impact" from immediate compliance with PUCO's January 23 order, despite AEP Ohio's protest that the matter does not require an immediate resolution.
Email This StoryCopyright 2010-
|
|
|
|
|