08/09: Dominion Energy offered the first twenty-five thousand Duke Ohio customers who sign up by September 30, 2009 a fixed electric rate of 6.88 cents per kilowatt hour through December 2010. This fixed rate is approximately 20 percent less than the incumbent Duke Energy’s current electric rate price of 8.61 cents per kilowatt hour. The lower Dominion Energy rate would apply only to the electricity consumed portion of a customer’s total electricity bill.
Source: The Enquirer/Cincinnati.Com
http://news.cincinnati.com/

01/09: The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio voted to allow utility surcharges for FirstEnergy Corporation to expire. The utility surcharges were originally put in place to allow Ohio electric utilities to recoup some of the costs incurred during preparation for electricity deregulation that never occurred.
Source: The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio
http://www.puco.ohio.gov/

03/06: The Supreme Court of Ohio ruled that FirstEnergy’s auction plan was in violation of the 1999 retail choice legislation because FirstEnergy had not provided an alternative choice to its customers.
Source: The Supreme Court of Ohio
http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/

08/05: The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) issued a report showing the progress of The Ohio Retail Electric Choice Program. The report covered the progress that had been made in the area of retail choice since 2002. Key developments were as follows:

• In the residential market, the megawatthours (MWh) sold by alternative electric suppliers grew from 60 to 73 percent in the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company territory, from 36 to 43 percent in the Toledo Edison Company territory, from 22 to 30 percent in the Ohio Edison company territory, and from 2 to 5 percent in the Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company territory.
• In the commercial market, the MWh sold by alternative electric suppliers grew from 50 to 61 percent in the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company territory, from 38 to 42 percent in the Ohio Edison Company territory, from 32 to 38 percent in the Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company territory, and from 9 to 19 percent in the Dayton Power and Light Company. These numbers dropped slightly from 51 to 49 percent in the Toledo Edison Company territory and from 6 to 4 percent in the Columbus Southern Power Company territory.
• In the industrial market, the MWh sold by alternative electric suppliers grew from 28 to 64 percent in the Dayton Power and Light Company territory, from 18 to 20 percent in the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company territory, from 9 to 18 percent in the Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company territory, and 4 to 5 percent in the Toledo Edison Company territory. This number dropped slightly from 32 to 29 percent in the Ohio Edison Company territory.
Source: Public Utilities Commission of Ohio
http://www.puco.ohio.gov/emplibrary/files/media/publications/

01/03: The Ohio Consumers’ Counsel (OCC) published its 2002 End-of-Year Update on Ohio’s Electric Market that reviewed the past two years of competition in Ohio. According to the report, “813,000 residential consumers statewide – or about 20 percent of those who were eligible to participate in electric choice-actually switched electric suppliers.” Most of those customers participated in community aggregation groups. At the time, Cleveland Electric Illuminating had the highest percentage of customers who switched to an alternative supplier.

10/02: The Public Utilities Commission received Dayton Power & Light’s proposal to extend its current generation rate freeze from December 31, 2003 to December 31, 2005.

10/02: Dominion Retail Inc., a licensed retail electric supplier by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, was offering one-year contracts to residential customers of Cinergy’s Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company’s (CG&E). The contracts were proposed to end in December 2003, but the offer would expire on November 29, 2002. Dominion’s limited time offer was for 4.70 cents per kilowatt-hour, which was approximately 10 percent below CG&E’s current price to compare of 5.22 cents per kilowatt-hour.

09/02: The Ohio Consumers' Counsel along with the Industrial Energy Users - Ohio and the American Municipal Power - filed a complaint against Dayton Power and Light for violating the Electric Choice Law. According to an OCC press release, "DP&L had failed to comply with a PUCO order to transfer operational control of its electric transmission facilities to a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) - approved Regional Transmission Organization." These organizations filed a similar complaint against American Electric Power (AEP) in June 2002.

07/02: The Ohio Consumers' Council (OCC) released its "Summer 2002 Electric Market Update," which stated that "progress towards meaningful electric choice for the state's residential consumers had begun to stall." In central and southern Ohio, two competitive residential suppliers existed until New Power declared bankruptcy. The other supplier at the time, an affiliate of FirstEnergy, "has restricted its activity to FirstEnergy's traditional service territory in northern Ohio." Many Ohio residential customers did not have the opportunity to participate in retail competition, and community aggregation had been the primary option.

06/02: The PUCO issued their first quarter "switching statistics," summaries of electric customer choice switch rates in terms of sales and customers, for 2002. In terms of customers, 52.58 percent of residential Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company customers switched to a certified retail electric supplier (CRES) while 18.36 percent of commercial and 24.34 percent of industrial customers switched. Toledo Edison Company had 45.84 percent of residential customers, 3.43 percent of commercial customers, and 20.66 percent of industrial customers switch to a CRES. Ohio Edison Company had 16.43 percent of residential customers, 8.54 percent of commercial customers, and 30.90 percent of industrial customers switch to a CRES. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company, Columbus Southern Power Company, and Dayton Power and Light Company had less than 1 percent switch to a CRES. No Monongahela Power Company or Ohio Power Company customers were participating in the Ohio Electric Choice program at the time.

06/02: According to a press release, Allegheny Energy Supply, a subsidiary of Allegheny Energy, Inc., sold "approximately 45,000 residential and commercial accounts in FirstEnergy's northern Ohio service territory" to Dominion Retail, Inc., a subsidiary of Dominion. Dominion Retail would replace Allegheny Energy Supply as the customers' certified retail electric supplier, but customers "would continue to receive one bill from their local utility."

06/02: The Triad Research Group completed its 2002 Research Report for the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio as part of the Ohio Electric Choice campaign. According to this annual market survey, customers were more supportive and knowledgeable of electric choice because of the increase in advertising. However, customers were less interested and concerned about the “reliability of electric service.” Of the customers surveyed, “only 5.1% reported switching suppliers, while one-quarter (25.9%) had decided to not switch.”

04/02: The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) released The Ohio Retail Electric Choice Programs Report of Market Activity for the Year 2001 to the Ohio General Assembly. The report summarized "the market activity during the first year of Ohio's retail electric choice program." According to the report, the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company had 50 percent of its customers switch to alternative suppliers. 15 percent of Ohio Edison's customers switched, and over 4 percent of Toledo Edison's customers chose another electric supplier. While Cincinnati Gas and Electric, Columbus Southern Power, Dayton Power and Light had less than 1 percent of its customers switch. No Monongahela Power or Ohio Power customers switched during 2001.

01/02: The Ohio Consumers' Counsel released the first report card for Ohio's electric choice program. Overall, the OCC said electric customers were "better off than they were before electric choice." About 15 percent of eligible customers switched electric suppliers in 2001, mainly former customers of the three FirstEnergy companies. In northern Ohio, 158 communities aggregated their load and chose an alternative supplier. The counsel recommended that the state work out a plan to attract more alternative suppliers in less competitive areas of the state; issue competitive bidding rules at the end of the transition period; develop more conservation and energy efficiency programs and policies; and implement a regional transmission organization. On the federal level, the counsel recommended monitoring mechanisms to curb market power and guaranteeing adequate wholesale power reserves.

09/01: The PUCO adopted rules for local government aggregation of electricity customers. Under Ohio's restructuring legislation passed in July 1999, local governments could serve as an aggregator for electricity customers. The new rules focused on three issues: Cooperation of the utilities in providing lists of the customers in the local government's jurisdiction, forming programs for customers to "opt-out" of the aggregation, and the requirements for providing customers with written notices of inclusion in the aggregation unless the customer specifically "opted-out."

01/01: Retail direct access to competitive electricity suppliers began on January 1, 2001, in the State. The first month saw about 97,622 customers in First Energy territories switch suppliers. Standard Offer Rates ranged from 3.6 to 4.9 cents/kWh in the three FirstEnergy subsidiary territories of Toledo Edison, Ohio Edison, and Cleveland Illuminating.

12/00: Beginning January 1, 2001, Ohio residential, commercial, and industrial consumers were scheduled to have access to retail markets for electricity. Consumer education programs were available on the Ohio Electric Choice web site, through mass mailing by the PUCO, and by telephone.

10/00: Allegheny Energy's (parent of Monongahela Power) restructuring plan was approved by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO). Competition and a 5 percent residential rate reduction were scheduled to begin January 1, 2001. Rates would be frozen through the development period, which was proposed to be 2003 for large industrial consumers and 2005 for residential consumers.

10/00: American Electric Power's (parent company for Ohio Power and Columbus Southern Power) restructuring plan was approved by the PUCO. Retail competition was scheduled to begin January 1, 2001, with residential consumers receiving a 5 percent rate reduction. More than $600 million in transition costs were proposed to be collected through 2007 (for Ohio Power) and 2008 (for Columbus Southern Power). Certain residential customers would have transition charges waived. Also, rates would be frozen through the development period or 2005, whichever came first. Shopping credits, incentives and switching procedures would also be provided, and AEP agreed to absorb $40 million of customer education, customer choice implementation, and transition plan filing costs.

10/00: Dayton Power and Light's (DP&L) transition plan to begin retail competition for all customers by January 2001 was approved by the PUC. Under the agreement, DP&L generation rates would be capped until the end of the recovery period when transition costs were scheduled to be fully recovered, December 31, 2003. Transmission and distribution rates would be capped through the end of 2006. The plan included a 5 percent residential rate reduction to the generation portion for customers who remain with DP&L, beginning January 1, 2001. Additionally, DP&L would pay up to $1 million for a voluntary enrollment procedure if at least 20 percent of its customers had not chosen another supplier by September 30, 2003.

09/00: The PUCO approved the Cincinnati Gas & Electric (CG&E) restructuring plan. Retail electric choice was proposed to be offered beginning January 1, 2001. The price of electricity would be unbundled into its components (generation, transmission, distribution), and a rate cap would be in effect for five years for all residential customers. Additionally, residential customers who stay with their current supplier would receive a 5 percent rate reduction in the generation portion of their bill.

07/00: An agreement was reached on AEP's transition plan. Transition costs recovery would be limited through 2007 for Ohio Power consumers and 2008 for Southern Power consumers. Distribution rates would also be frozen for the recovery period for residential consumers.

07/00: First Energy's (Ohio Edison, Toledo Edison, and The Illuminating Company) restructuring plan was approved by the PUCO. The plan called for recovery of transition costs through 2006 for Ohio Edison, mid-2007 for Toledo Edison, and 2008 for Illuminating Company. Competition was scheduled to begin January 1, 2001, and residential consumers would receive a 5 percent rate reduction on the generation portion. Distribution rates were scheduled to be frozen through 2007.

07/00: Allegheny Energy reached a settlement on its transition plan. The plan called for recovery of up to $6.3 million in stranded costs, 5-percent rate reductions for residential consumers, and a 3-year rate freeze for industrial and commercial consumers.

07/00: Monongahela Power reached a settlement on its restructuring plan. The plan would shorten the development period for competition for large customers to end December 31, 2003, and for small customers, December 31, 2005. Residential customers would also receive a 5-percent rate reduction, and rates would then be frozen for the remainder of the development period.

01/00: AEP (Ohio Power and Columbus Southern Power) filed its transition plan with the PUCO. The plan included a requested recovery of $974 million in regulatory assets.

01/00: Monongahela Power filed its transition plan with the PUCO. Included was a request for $13 million in stranded cost recovery.

01/00: Cincinnati Gas & Electric filed its transition plan with the PUCO. The plan included: 5 percent residential rate reduction in the generation portion of rates, effective January 2001; rate unbundling into the generation, transmission, distribution, and transition costs components; recovery of $927 million in transition and stranded costs; corporate separation of regulated and unregulated functions; participation in the MidWest ISO; and a consumer education plan. The PUCO was scheduled to rule on the plan before Oct. 31, 2000.

01/00: Dayton Power & Light filed its transition plan with the PUCO. The plan included a 5 percent residential rate reduction for generation; a cap on all prices through December 31, 2004; customer choice by January 1, 2001; recovery of $441 million in transition costs; and a consumer education program. The PUCO was scheduled to issue comments and recommendations related to the plan within 90 days, and a final order within 275 days.

01/00: First Energy (Ohio Edison, The Illuminating Company, and Toledo Edison) refiled a transition plan with the PUCO to conform to the new rules established to comply with Ohio’s restructuring law. The plan included: requested recovery of $7 billion for transition and stranded costs; operational and technical support changes to allow for retail direct access by January 1, 2001; plans to transfer control of transmission assets to the Alliance RTO; unbundled prices; corporate separation of regulated and unregulated business; and an education program for consumers.

10/99: The PUCO issued an initial set of rules for transition to a competitive retail market. The draft rules included provisions for recovery of stranded costs, corporate unbundling, consumer education, and employee protections.

10/99: FirstEnergy filed a restructuring plan with the PUCO. The plan included passing $6.9 billion to customers over 8 years, but said bills would not increase over the transition period. Three separate plans were filed for its subsidiary utilities: Ohio Edison, Illuminating Co., and Toledo Edison.

07/99: The restructuring legislation, Senate Bill 3, was signed into law by the governor on July 6, 1999. The legislation would allow retail customers to choose their energy suppliers beginning January 1, 2001. The new law required 5 percent residential rate reductions and a rate freeze for 5 years, contains consumer protections, environmental provisions, and labor protections, and empowers the PUCO to determine the amount and recovery period for stranded costs. Also, the property tax utilities paid in the past was replaced with an excise tax on consumer bills. Utilities were required to spend $30 million over the next six years on consumer education programs.

06/99: The restructuring legislation would allow retail customers to choose their energy suppliers beginning January 1, 2001. It also would require a 5 percent residential rate reduction and a rate freeze for 5 years.

08/98: A lawsuit aimed at blocking conjunctive service regulations was thrown out of court. Because of this, the PUCO would move ahead with plans for a conjunctive billing service.

06/98: The PUCO approved Monongahela's tariff for conjunctive electric service, the first tariff approved that would allow groups of consumers to aggregate and negotiate the price for electricity.

12/97: Stranded costs were addressed in the report issued by the co-chairs of the Legislative Joint Committee on Electric Deregulation. The plan allowed for recovery of stranded costs using nonbypassable wires charges. Utilities would be allowed during the 5-year transition period beginning January 2000 and ending December 2004 to receive “transition revenues” or stranded costs under certain conditions, but would likely expect less than 100 percent of recovery.

12/96: The PUCO adopted guidelines for Conjunctive Electric Services. The 2-year pilot program would allow ratepayers to band together for collective billing under rates designed for the group. (The pilot was an experiment in innovative pricing, and did not allow for retail wheeling.)