Update:  On July 23, 2014, parties, including the OMA, filed post-hearing briefs. OMA Energy Group argued that AEP Ohio’s ESP application was not more beneficial, in the aggregate, than a market rate offer, and that it should be denied by the Commission. OMA Energy Group also argued that if the Commission decides to modify and approve AEP’s application, that the Commission should take the following actions: (1) not permit AEP Ohio to retain the right to terminate the ESP early; (2) not permit AEP Ohio to increase the amounts collected under the distribution infrastructure rider (Rider DIR); (3) not establish the basic transmission cost rider (Rider BTCR); (4) not establish the power purchase agreement rider (Rider PPA); (5) not establish the sustained and skilled workforce rider (Rider SSWR); and (6) not permit AEP Ohio to establish or recover under proposed North American Electric Reliability compliance and cybersecurity rider (Rider NCCR) any amounts unless or until new compliance and/or cybersecurity measures are implemented. OMAEG’s reply brief is due on August 15, 2014.