Update:  On November 14, 2013, Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. (Duke), filed an application for rehearing of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio’s (Commission) decision to submit its proposed rules to the Joint Commission on Agency Rule Review (JCARR).  On November 15, 2013, FirstEnergy and Dayton Power & Light (DP&L) also filed applications for rehearing.  FirstEnergy and DP&L’s main concerns with the proposed rules, as set forth in their applications for rehearing, are related to the definition of “advanced meter” in the regulations, and customers’ ability to opt-out of smart meter installation.

The issue that Duke, First Energy, and DP&L (collectively, the utilities) advance regarding the definition of “advanced meter,” which includes AMR and ERT meters, is that a number of utilities have already installed AMR and ERT meters in many locations throughout their territories.  If the utilities are forced to permit customers with installed meters to opt-out of smart meter installation, the utilities will have to remove these meters and replace them with traditional meters.  The utilities contend that such replacement is an unnecessary business expense.  They also state that including AMR and ERT meters in the definition of “advanced meter,” which ultimately permits customers who have these types of meters to opt out of the utilities’ advanced meter installation programs, is not in line with the privacy concerns regarding smart meters.  The AMR and ERT meters do not collect and share the same amount of information as smart meters do.   The utilities also argue that the one day notice requirement for opt out may disrupt their daily operations; however, they do agree that the one day notice for opt-out could be possible under a full scale deployment.

Further, FirstEnergy claims that the Commission did not follow the proper process in proposing these rules.  FirstEnergy claims that the customer’s right to opt out does nothing to increase the accuracy of the meters in accordance with Section 4905.28, Revised Code.  Additionally, FirstEnergy claims that the Commission did not consider the adverse business impact of its decision on utilities, as required by Section 107.52, Revised Code.

Any memoranda contra the applications for rehearing must be filed by November 25, 2013.