In the Matter of the Commission Review of the Capacity Charges of Ohio Power Company and Columbus Southern Power Company, Case Nos. 2012-2098 and 2013-0228

ISSUES:

-Was the decision by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) in an AEP-Ohio rate case unlawful and unreasonable because the PUCO attempted to regulate a competitive service in direct contradiction to state law?

-Did the PUCO lack ratemaking authority over AEP's transactions that don't involve supplying electricity to consumers?

-Did the PUCO lack the authority to interpret the contract provisions of an agreement approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)?

-Did AEP-Ohio present evidence as required in these cases, and did the PUCO comply with the requirements contained in R.C. Chapter 4909?

-Was the PUCO's authorization unlawful and unreasonable when it approved above-market compensation to AEP-Ohio and set capacity rates at a level greater than the market-based auction prices?

-Did the PUCO improperly fail to restore the market-based auction pricing as required by R.C 4928.143(C)(2)(b)?

-Were the two-tiered rates established by the PUCO in two 2012 entries based on the record?

-Did the PUCO improperly fail to order AEP-Ohio to refund certain capacity charges or to credit certain amounts?

-Was the PUCO's conduct in these matters "arbitrary and capricious," an abuse of discretion, and outside the law?