In re Application of Columbus Southern Power Co. for Approval of Its Program Portfolio Plan

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio upheld the Public Utilities Commission's order approving Columbus Southern Power Company's energy-efficiency and peak-demand-reduction program portfolio plan. The court rejected challenges concerning the revenue-decoupling mechanism, rate-impact analysis, peak-demand-reduction methods, and the exclusion of a benchmark-comparison method for mercantile customers. The court concluded that any error in the commission's reasoning was harmless and affirmed the order.

Holdings

1. R.C. 4928.66(D) and Ohio Adm.Code 4901:1-39-07(A) do not require a utility to prove its cost of service before the commission may approve a revenue-decoupling mechanism. The statute does not absolutely prohibit recovery of potentially forgone revenue merely because the utility's cost of service is unknown.
2. When the commission reviews a contested stipulation, its findings must remain supported by record evidence. However, the commission's erroneous reasoning did not warrant reversal or remand because IEU did not challenge the legality of the specific decision to shorten the decoupling mechanism and did not show that the law required further action; the error was harmless.
3. The commission adequately considered the overall rate impacts on Ohio customers.
4. IEU forfeited its argument that the plan was not designed to achieve the statutory mandates because it failed to raise that argument on rehearing before the commission. The commission did not abuse its discretion by declining to adopt IEU's preferred method because R.C. 4928.66 does not require the least-cost method and the commission could consider benefits and other concerns in addition to cost.
5. The commission did not commit reversible error by rejecting the benchmark-comparison method and was not required to accept the parties' stipulation or develop the specific exemption standards before approving the portfolio plan.

Questions Presented

1. Whether R.C. 4928.66(D) or Ohio Adm.Code 4901:1-39-07(A) required Columbus Southern Power to present cost-of-service evidence before the commission could approve a revenue-decoupling mechanism.
2. Whether the commission's evidentiary reasoning concerning a contested stipulation required reversal or remand.
3. Whether the commission failed to consider overall rate impacts on Ohio customers.
4. Whether Columbus Southern Power's peak-demand-reduction plan was unlawful or whether the commission abused its discretion by rejecting IEU's preferred, allegedly less expensive method.
5. Whether the commission erred by rejecting the benchmark-comparison method for mercantile-customer exemptions.

Disposition

affirmed