|
|
|
|
|
PUC Defers Consideration Of Potential Changes To Nonbypassable Rider For Non-Market RTO Charges, Opt-out
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The PUC of Ohio has deferred, to the FirstEnergy Ohio utilities' current electric security plan proceeding, potential changes to the utilities' Rider NMB and the Rider NMB opt-out pilot
Rider NMB recovers non-market-based costs, fees or charges imposed on or charged to the EDCs by FERC, the State of Ohio, a regional transmission organization, independent transmission operator, transmission owner, or similar organization approved by FERC or the PUCO, and any other non-market-based charges impacting both CRES [retail] and SSO Suppliers where such charges and credits generally fall into the following non-market-based related categories (i) PJM charges and credits for service including, but not limited to, procuring transmission services, transmission enhancement, uplift charges, generation deactivation, and out-of-market bilateral settlements; and (ii) Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO) Transmission Expansion Plan (MTEP) charges assessed under Schedule 26 of the MISO Tariff, whether assessed directly by MISO, PJM or American Transmission Systems, Incorporated.
Rider NMB is generally nonbypassable, and retail suppliers are not assigned any costs included in Rider NMB as listed above, for those customers who pay Rider NMB
However, a pilot program allows certain large customers to opt-out of Rider NMB, and to pay the relevant non-market-based transmission charges either through their retail supplier (meaning the retail supplier is allocated such charges from PJM), or directly themselves.
During prior consideration of whether to continue Rider NMB or revert back to assigning all related costs to the LSE (SSO supplier or retail supplier), PUCO expressed concerns about a potential negative impact to the retail market, due to current retail contracts whose pricing likely does not reflect the costs which would be re-assigned to retail suppliers
"This uncertainty continues to give us pause," PUCO said today in declining to make any changes to Rider NMB and the pilot mechanism in response to an audit report
Rather, PUCO said that Rider NMB issues should be addressed in the FirstEnergy utilities' current ESP proceeding
"We stress once more the importance of developing the necessary evidentiary record before effectuating changes to Rider NMB, whether they apply to rate design or otherwise," PUCO said
"[M]ore information is needed," as to how various recommendations could potentially impact customers and the market in general, PUCO said
PUCO said that, in the interim, if any customers wish to opt-out of Rider NMB, they may file an application for a reasonable arrangement to do so (as the pilot enrollment period has ended)
PUCO's order also addressed a hearing examiner's show cause order that had directed the FirstEnergy utilities to show why a forfeiture should not be imposed on the EDCs due to the EDCs' alleged failure to timely file certain data responses in the NMB audit
PUCO said, "[W]e find that the Companies should not be assessed a forfeiture for the alleged failure to timely respond to data requests in this audit, given the unique nature of the information requested in DR-001, subpart (h). As noted in Staff’s comments in response to this issue, FirstEnergy appears to have complied with all outstanding data requests as of May 1, 2023."
Case 22-391-EL-RDR
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
April 16, 2025
Email This Story
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
|
|
|
|
|