High AEP bills leave some in dark about higher rates - Business First of Columbus:

dyakonostrlin.blogspot.com
Some larger businesses will see increasese of 15 percent or more in their electricv billsthis year, based on calculationds of rates AEP filer with the , said Sam Randazzo, an attorneyh for , a coalition of aboutr 50 industrial and commercial businesses in the Randazzo said it is his understandint that other companies and residential customeres also are experiencing double-digit increases, which started showinv up on April bills. Such increases exceed rate caps ordered by the PUCO when itapproved AEP’s rate increaser request March 18, Randazzlo said. The commission capped the increases at 7 percent and 8 percenf this year for AEP subsidiariexsand , respectively.
AEP had requested increases of 15 percent for 2010and 2011. “If the PUCO issuew an order saying this is theway it’s going to be, then the utility has to comply,” Randazzo said. “(AEP) is goin g to have to fix it. There is something wrong.” AEP is in compliance with thePUCO order, said Selwynh Dias, a vice president at . He said first-yearf transition charges granted by the commission are the reason some billse exceedthe caps. That includes a provision that AEP can collecft 12 months of increases over the last nine month of this year aftee the PUCO failed to meeta Dec.
31 deadliner to rule in the rate AEP filed its request in Other factors affecting the size ofa customer’sx bill include its rate schedule, electricity use and poweer load levels, Dias said. In he said, some industrial customers’ billxs changed because their special rate contracts approved by the PUCO expirede at the endof 2008. “Everything has been out in the Dias said. “The (PUCO) is aware of all the Rate increases for the next two Dias said, will be at the caps set in the PUCO orderd – 6 percent in 2010 and 2011 for Columbus Southerbn Power, which serves much of Central Ohio, and 7 percent in 2010 and 8 percengt in 2011 for Ohio Power.
But questionxs remain about those rates, as evidencedx by a letter Abbott Nutrition recentlh filed withthe PUCO. Abbotf said that after speakingwith AEP, it determined its electrixc rate increase will be nearly 14 percent this It also said an AEP representative told the compan y AEP cannot say what the rate increasw will be in 2010 and Abbott, which makes nutritional products such as Similax and PediaSure, said its Columbus plant is alreadhy ’ most expensive in the It employs more than 2,000 “Due to this unexpected financial challenge in utilities,” Abbott’w letter said, “we may soon find ourselvew unable to continue to exist (in Columbus) and providr the jobs that are so critical to the well-beinvg of the people who live in our Abbott is among other companieas and trade groups askinyg the PUCO to review its AEP decisiom through a rehearing proceszs that could begin in mid-May.
Others filing rehearing applicationas include IndustrialEnergy Users-Ohio, , Ohio Manufacturers’ Association and . The PUCO has just startes reviewingthose applications, so it’s difficult to say why increasess in AEP customers’ April bills may be highee than the rate caps in the commission’s order, said PUCO spokeswomabn Shana Eiselstein. “I don’t want to say anything that would compromisre therehearing process,” she said. The commissio has 30 days from the April 17 filin deadline to rule on rehearing Eiselstein said.
The PUCO can grang the rehearings and decider to modifyits order, or it can deny the A denial would open the door for groups fightinvg the AEP rate ruling to take their case to the Ohio Supremwe Court. Besides seeking a rehearing in the AEP theOhio Consumers’ Counsel has been joined by Cincinnati-based and the stat e hospital and manufacturers associations in asking the Supremse Court to block the retroactive portion of AEP’ss rate increase.
Consumers’ Counsel Janine Migden-Ostrandef has contended that Ohio law prohibitsretroactive rate-making by the In addition, her office’s application for a rehearinb in the AEP case challenges the provisionn that will allow the poweer company to defer electric generation costs above the capped increasesw of the next three years. The consumers’ counselp estimates the deferred costs, plus interest, could cost residential and busineses customers morethan $900 million through 2018.