With amendments from various interested parties making their way into the bill, she offered some of her own, honing in on the following seven areas of concern outlined in her eight-page written testimony:

1. Comparing the market rate option to the Electric Security Plan rate;
   
2. The Electric Security Plan;
   
3. Due process and transparency;
   
4. Renewable energy;
   
5. Clarifying the recovery mechanisms for new construction;
   
6. Energy efficiency; and
   
7. Federal advocate

Defending the wallets of her agency's constituents, the OCC made it clear that for Ohio to produce the best, most cost-effective public policy that includes just and reasonable rates, utilities must be required to compare and contrast a Market Rate Option with the Electric Security Plan, a stipulation she said the current bill does not offer.

"The utilities should not have the discretion, as S.B. 221 now sets forth, to decide whether they file a Market Rate Option or an Electric Security Plan. The utilities should be required to file both." By doing so, the former Enron attorney said that utility executives, who have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders, "will choose the option that is best for its shareholders, which may not be the best for the consumers."

It would be bad public policy to put so much power in the hands of the utilities to control such outcomes. At its core, regulation is intended to achieve results that serve the public interest rather than the private interests of the regulated utilities. Leaving too much discretion in the hands of the utilities would be adverse to interests of consumers and to economic development in the State of Ohio." Migden-Ostrander

The promised land of a competitive Ohio energy market place, which some said would be "one of the most active and viable competitive electric retail markets in the nation" but never matured to as prophesized in 1999 when Ohio's deregulation bill was passed, is still being used by industry representatives as a foil to again convince lawmakers to let energy producers call the tune of energy costs, who pays for them and over what period of time.

Their goal is to is to shift the financial burden of energy production from company shareholders to industry and residential users, who could be stuck with irreversible rates well into the future.

ARTIFICIAL RATES WOULD BE WINDFALL TO UTILITIES

When the electric horses break from the gate and race across the track of Ohio's new electric frontier, will the rates be fair or will they be inflated by the utilities by design, giving them an unfair head start and windfall revenues?

The bill currently states that the rate in effect at the time the legislation becomes effective will be the rate used as the "base" from which to determine the rate under the proposed Electric Security Plan, a determination of valuation by the Ohio Public Utilities Commission (PUCO).

The OCC observed that, because rates for all utilities fluctuate over the year, the fear is that base rates will be set higher than the average, which will only benefit the utility. She also cautioned legislators to watch out for the elimination of seasonal rates, a second door to utilities raking in more rate revenue than they should be allowed to collect.

PEERING THROUGH THE DARKNESS INTO THE LIGHT

For the average Ohioan, delving into the guts of a utility rate case may be as welcoming as figuring out why today's gas prices are what they are. But for some, like the rate sleuths at OCC, jumping into a sea of numbers is just another day at the beach, which it is, according to their statutory mission.

The OCC said "due and transparency remain a central concern for residential consumers as we proceed into future rate-setting," and said that to protect all customers, "...we continue to seek fairness and accountability. President Reagan said: `Trust, but
verify.'" Adequate time, verification of costs, audit and "true up" hearings were a few of the agency's recommendations for giving residential utility users the tools they need to see for themselves the inner workings of negotiations between a utility and the PUCO.

I cannot stress enough the importance of due process and the ability to verify costs, which has been problematic in proceedings during the last several years. We at OCC continue to be concerned about approaches that basically involve "picking a number," oftentimes without the involvement of representatives of the customers that pay a large share of the number picked." Migden-Ostrander

Commenting on the renewable energy portion of the bill, the OCC said the agency was disappointed with the changes made on advanced energy, and said the removal of even the "most modest of oversight possibilities and imposed conditions that could allow the utilities to avoid any responsibility to supply renewable energy" were a "very deep disappointment.

Stating the obvious, despite that the obvious often eludes the grasp of lawmakers when they need it the most, the OCC declared that energy efficiency still remains the "least cost of all options," and noted that no one had yet testified that "energy efficiency is not a good idea." She said her agency will continue to participate in federal proceedings to represent her customer base.

John Michael Spinelli is a former Ohio Statehouse reporter who now serves as OhioNews Bureau chief for ePluribus Media.