Update:  OMAEG filed comments in this proceeding on February 4, 2014, stating that DP&L did not provide enough information to allow interested parties to properly comment.  The Ohio Consumers’ Counsel (OCC), the Industrial Energy Users – Ohio (IEU-Ohio), and Duke Energy Commercial Asset Management, Inc. all filed motions to intervene.  OCC, IEU-Ohio, FirstEnergy Solutions, Staff, Direct Energy, and Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. filed comments in this proceeding.

All the parties that filed comments are in agreement that DP&L did not provide enough information in its application for the interested parties to conduct any substantive analysis of DP&L’s plan to transfer its assets.  Accordingly, the intervening parties requested that the Commission refrain from granting DP&L’s request for transfer or approve its requests for waiver until DP&L has supplemented its application and the intervening parties have had the opportunity to comment on the supplemental information.

Staff also suggested that the Commission require DP&L to supplement its application no later than August 1, 2016.  Direct Energy commented that the Commission should follow the precedent set in the AEP-Ohio SSO proceeding with respect to OVEC assets and direct DP&L to sell power from OVEC into the PJM market.  Direct Energy also stated that DP&L should be required to divest its Beckjord Generation Station assets, as the Commission has already ordered DP&L to divest all of its generation assets.  Finally, OCC stated that the Commission should entirely reject DP&L’s application because it does not meet the requirements of Section 4928.17(E), Revised Code.  OCC suggests that DP&L be required to promptly file a new application.

Reply comments are due on February 19, 2014.  We believe that it is unnecessary for OMAEG to file reply comments.