Advocates are entering the regulatory fray to push the utility company to commit to more equitable, reliable service that also furthers the clean energy transition.
FirstEnergy delivers a new transformer to a Lakewood, Ohio, substation to help improve grid reliability. (FirstEnergy, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, via Flicker)
Before a utility can raise electricity rates, it must get approval from regulators. In Ohio, some groups are looking to step into that process to make sure FirstEnergy, whose utilities supply power to over 2 million customers in the state, uses some of the money it will receive from ratepayers to equitably enable the clean energy transition.
Five environmental and clean-energy advocacy groups are among the 22 entities that have filed for formal party status in FirstEnergy’s latest rate case. Intervening in this manner is the main way organizations can provide evidence to regulators and influence utilities’ rate-related decisions.
That ability has become increasingly important as ratepayers nationwide struggle with an affordability crisis. Meanwhile, the aging grid faces growing reliability issues and ballooning demand from data centers.
A top ask from the Ohio groups is that FirstEnergy ensures customer money goes toward improving equitable grid service. Utility customers who live in disadvantaged census tracts — as determined by a Biden administration climate and economic justice screening tool — are twice as likely to have low-voltage circuits and older equipment as customers in other regions. That’s according to a 2025 analysis from the Interstate Renewable Energy Council commissioned by the Ohio Environmental Council.
“Disadvantaged communities are really at risk from surges in power or being cut off from power, and we want to see that addressed in this case,” said Nolan Rutschilling, managing director of energy policy for the Ohio Environmental Council, which is one of the groups that filed to intervene in FirstEnergy’s rate case.
Lower-quality grid infrastructure doesn’t just affect reliability in these areas. It also can limit opportunities to add rooftop and community solar, as these new distributed solar resources tend to have more problems connecting to low-voltage circuits and older equipment. That could prevent homes and businesses from getting credit for any extra electricity they might produce and provide to the local grid through net metering.
FirstEnergy filed its application to raise rates across its three Ohio utilities in May. Starting in July 2027, the company wants to bump up the portion of customers’ bills related to the distribution grid. On average, the plan would result in households paying around $5 more per month for each of the next three years, for a total increase of roughly $15 per month by mid-2029. Growth in the cost of electricity generation could spike bills even higher; however, this rate case doesn’t address that, since Ohio is among the states in which power producers’ prices are not regulated and they can sell energy on a competitive market.
For the Vote Solar, the rate case marks the nonprofit advocacy group’s first foray into an Ohio regulatory matter, said Will Kenworthy, its Midwest regulatory director. Vote Solar has previously participated in cases in Michigan, Indiana, and Iowa.
“We look at the electricity grid as part of the bigger picture to achieving clean energy and decarbonization broadly,” Kenworthy said.
Power a Clean Future Ohio, a nonprofit that advises local governments on clean energy, has similar worries that an inadequate grid could clash with communities’ initiatives to adopt renewables and reduce energy waste.
The rate case is taking place as climate change drives more extreme weather, fueling concerns about reliability. The City of Lakewood, an intervening party, has previously filed complaints with regulators about frequent outages, even on days with fair weather. This summer, Lakewood was hit with blackouts that coincided with a heat wave likely made more severe by climate change.
“It’s really important that utilities not receive a blank check to collect more money from ratepayers without improvement in performance,” Rutschilling said. “As we see more frequent extreme weather and unpredictable weather, then that’s putting even more of a strain on the grid.”
Meanwhile, environmental and climate advocates want more financial support for low-income households to make energy-efficiency upgrades. They’re also pushing FirstEnergy to experiment with money-saving programs like residential demand response. Already employed by utilities elsewhere, that approach pays customers to dial down energy use when demand on the grid peaks.
Another idea for FirstEnergy is time-variable rates: Essentially, make electricity cheaper when demand is lower, incentivizing homes and businesses to shift their energy use to those hours. By next July, most of the territory served by the company’s utilities will already have smart meters that could track such use.
“With energy prices high on the commodity side, it’s important to see if there are opportunities working with FirstEnergy on the delivery side to find savings for customers,” said Robert Kelter, an attorney for the Environmental Law and Policy Institute, which is also involved in the case.
So far, FirstEnergy appears to have a more limited view on what belongs in the rate proceedings.
“Because of what’s happening with affordability and what we need to do as a company, we need to balance what is in a rate case and what is not in a rate case. And right now we’re really trying to prioritize our reliability,” said Abigail Phillips, vice president and chief risk officer for FirstEnergy. Other issues might be folded in later once the company meets that priority, she added.
Additional intervenors include various business groups, local governments, and consumer-interest groups.
Regulators grant most motions to take part in rate cases, as long as they’re filed by the relevant deadline, which was Sept. 29. The parties have begun the fact-finding process, known as discovery.
Regulatory staff at the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio will weigh in with their recommendations on FirstEnergy’s proposed plan by Nov. 30. Intervenors will then have until just before New Year’s Eve to object to any points in that staff report or to detail changes they want made to FirstEnergy’s plan. An evidentiary hearing — basically, an administrative trial — is set to start in March.
This signup form requires necessary cookies.
Allow marketing cookies to load the newsletter signup form.