Last week, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) planned to finalize rules for how utilities should comply with Senate Bill 310 (SB 310)’s requirement to list the cost of Ohio’s energy efficiency and renewable energy programs on consumers’ bills, Gongwerreports (for more on SB 310, see our June 6, 2014 blog post). Carrie Dunn, an attorney representing major SB 310 supporter FirstEnergy Corp., supported the PUCO’s proposed rules, saying that “[u]tilizing the energy efficiency/peak demand reduction rider is the simplest and most efficient way to calculate these costs as it directly identifies the specific portion of the customer’s bill that is attributable to the energy efficiency and peak demand reduction compliance costs.” However, the Environmental Law & Policy Center leads a coalition of environmental groups that say simply multiplying each customer’s usage by the rider amount will “unfairly include other costs that aren’t required by law” such as experimental and pilot programs. The Ohio Consumers’ Council, along with environmental groups, recommend that PUCO require utilities to make it clear that the identified costs are not new charges, and that the “energy efficiency programs save customers money” to avoid confusion about the new information on billing statements.