Retail Supplier Objects To Utility's Proposed Tariff Language That Would Allow EDC To Suspend Utility Consolidated Billing If Supplier "Not Following" State's Administrative Code Rules

Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. has filed objections to a Public Utility Commission of Ohio Staff Report on the rate case of AEP Ohio (Ohio Power), including objections to proposed tariff language that would allow AEP Ohio to terminate "Company consolidated billing services" in the event that a competitive retail electric service (CRES) provider is not following the, "Ohio Administrative Code rules."

AEP Ohio's proposed tariff language had been exclusively first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com (see story for full details)

Constellation said in a filing at PUCO that, "AEP proposes tariff language that would allow it to terminate its consolidated billing service to a supplier if the supplier is 'not following the Ohio Administrative Code rules' and AEP has provided notice to the supplier. Tariff Sheet 103-52. Termination could occur three months after AEP’s notice. Id. AEP described this proposed change as a 'three strikes' policy that is consistent with its supplier-consolidated billing program. Application Schedule E-3 at 8; Moore Prefiled Testimony at 10-11. The Staff Report failed to address AEP’s proposal; rather, by omission, Staff recommends approval of the change. Staff Report at 27."

"Constellation objects to the Staff’s recommendation. AEP’s proposed language does not say that the supplier must be noncompliant three separate times or for three consecutive months before termination. Additionally, AEP’s proposed language is vague as to what 'not following the Ohio Administrative Code rules' means. A strict interpretation could allow AEP to terminate utility-consolidated billing based on its opinion of noncompliance, which could be unrelated to competitive service, be unrelated to billing or be a minor act of noncompliance. The proposed language omits the concept of materiality. Importantly, AEP’s language unreasonably establishes strict liability – noncompliance will result in notification and then AEP 'will terminate' three months after the notice. There is nothing allowing a supplier the opportunity to be heard, to dispute the alleged noncompliance or to attempt other redress. This proposed tariff provision could result in termination from utility-consolidated billing for something that the supplier is actively attempting to correct if, for example, a correction takes more than three months to fix. Altogether, the provision is unjust and unreasonable. Constellation objects to Staff’s recommendation to approve this unjust and unreasonable tariff language," Constellation said

Constellation also filed the following objections to AEP Ohio's applications:

• AEP failed to address its supplier-consolidated billing program. (Tariff Sheet 103-43)

• AEP failed to address access to customer consumption data by competitive retail electric service suppliers who have the necessary customer authorization. (Tariff Sheet 103-38)

• AEP failed to propose changes to its tariff to allow access to AMI data, including bulk extraction, by competitive retail electric service suppliers who have the necessary authorization. (Tariff Sheet 103-38)

Case No. 20-586-EL-ATA et al.