September 1, 2017, Volume 6, Issue 82

09/01/2017

Update: This case arose when DP&L and AES Ohio Generation (AES Ohio) filed a request to transfer generation facilities and ancillary assets to AES Ohio, its affiliate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). On September 16, 2016, OMAEG and others filed comments in the case that raised concerns about cross-subsidization that would occur if the transaction were to go through. Specifically, OMAEG was concerned that if the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) approved DP&L’s plan, retail customers would pay non-bypassable generation-related charges to DP&L that would be transferred to AES Ohio, its affiliate, which would give AES Ohio a competitive advantage over other wholesale market participants.

In the Order issued by FERC, FERC dismissed those concerns, rationalizing that because the transaction was subject to the authority of PUCO, which has imposed conditions on DP&L to avoid cross-subsidization issues, sufficient safeguards were in place to ensure against cross-subsidization. FERC noted that OMAEG and other intervenors would be able to challenge future filings before PUCO and that any party could raise a cross-subsidization issue that arises after the issuance of this order under FPA Section 206.

FERC ultimately authorized the transaction submitted by DP&L for approval, doing so without prejudice to FERC’s, or any other regulatory commission’s, authority with respect to rates, service, accounts, valuation, estimates or determinations of costs, or any other matter.

Top