Update:  On April 17, 2014, IEU-Ohio filed a Second Application for Rehearing alleging that the Commission’s Second Entry on Rehearing is unlawful and unreasonable.  Specifically, IEU-Ohio alleges that the Second Entry on Rehearing:

• Fails to identify the findings of fact and the reasons prompting the decision that there are additional non-quantifiable benefits of the Modified ESP that make it more favorable in the aggregate as compared to the expected results that would otherwise apply;
• Is unlawful and unreasonable because the Service Stability Rider and Service Stability Rider-Extension provide DP&L with transition revenue or its equivalent in violation of R.C. 4928.38;
• Is unlawful and unreasonable because it failed to terminate the authorization of the Service Stability Rider no later than January 1, 2016, the date by which DP&L’s generation assets must be transferred;
• Is unlawful and unreasonable because it fails to terminate authorization for the Service Stability Rider-Extension due to the Commission’s order that DP&L transfer generation assets by January 1, 2016; and
• Is unreasonable because it fails to reduce the amount of the total revenue that DP&L may seek to recover under the Service Stability Rider-Extension even though the term of the rider has been reduced by thirty-one days.

The Ohio Energy Group also filed a Second Application for Rehearing stating that the Commission should have instructed DP&L to terminate its Service Stability Rider on the effective date of divestiture of its generation assets, in light of the Commission’s decision to expedite the date by which DP&L must transfer its generation assets.