The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) recently adopted amendments to its procedural rules, moving the agency closer to implementation of the accelerated ratemaking framework enacted in Substitute House Bill (HB) Number 15 (136th General Assembly). Last month, through a Finding and Order issued in Case No. 25-695-AU-ORD, the PUCO amended provisions in Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 4901-1 governing filings, intervention, discovery, hearings, and briefing. To date, the rules have not been filed with Ohio’s Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR). The rules will take effect after they are reviewed by JCARR, about a 65-day process. The rules are expected to take effect later this year or by the first quarter next year.

The changes are designed to align PUCO practice with HB 15’s compressed schedule for general rate proceedings. Among other things, the law now requires the PUCO staff to file a report within 180 days after the PUCO deems a rate application to be complete. R.C. 4909.19. The PUCO must issue a final decision on the application within 360 days of the completeness date. R.C. 4909.421. For PUCO practitioners, several changes in Ohio Adm.Code 4901-1 warrant particular attention:

• More structured hearing practice. Each party will have one hour to cross-examine each witness in a general rate proceeding, subject to an Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) authority to extend the time for good cause. This is a substantial change in how rate cases are litigated at the PUCO. In multi-party cases involving extensive technical, accounting, cost-allocation, or policy evidence, the rule may lead parties with aligned interests to coordinate their examinations and avoid duplicative questioning. The proposal drew broad opposition from consumer advocates, competitive suppliers, large customer groups, and several utilities who argued that the time constraints could impair development of a complete record. The PUCO nevertheless adopted the rule, finding that the limitation would promote efficiency and clarity without negatively affecting due process. Recognizing the potential for gamesmanship, the PUCO also noted that an ALJ may extend the allotted time for cross-examination to address potential abuses.
• Earlier participation and discovery deadlines. Motions to intervene in general rate proceedings must be filed within 90 days after the PUCO deems an application complete. In addition, the cutoff for discovery is now 215 days after that completeness determination, rather than 14 days after the Staff Report.
• Tighter briefing and filing expectations. Changes mirror current requirements in the Supreme Court of Ohio’s Rule of Practice 3.09(B). Of note, initial post-hearing briefs are due 15 days after the hearing concludes, with reply briefs due seven days later. Also, briefs cannot exceed 50 numbered pages and must comply with other requirements in Rule 3.09(B).
• Earlier closing time for e-filing. This rule amendment moves the PUCO Docketing Division’s closing time from 5:30 p.m. to 5 p.m. This is a significant operational change after a long-standing 5:30 p.m. deadline. Counsel should recalibrate internal review, client-approval, settlement negotiations, and filing workflows accordingly. Although commenters cautioned that the shorter filing window could create practical burdens, PUCO concluded that a 30-minute earlier closing would not prejudice timely filers and would promote earlier document availability on case dockets.

The PUCO adopted these provisions over substantial stakeholder debate. It declined a range of other proposals, including requiring searchable PDFs; expanding ex parte disclosure and interlocutory review procedures; giving the Office of the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel automatic party status; allowing depositions of PUCO staff; and implementing a fixed deadline for filing stipulations. The PUCO also emphasized that ALJs retain discretion to waive procedural requirements for good cause where permitted.

The practical takeaway is that in rate cases, parties will need to assess the appropriateness of intervention earlier, develop discovery strategies on a faster timetable, and prepare for more streamlined hearings and briefing. Although the amendments aim to promote a quicker and more predictable rate-case process, their application in the first HB 15-era rate cases will determine how much flexibility remains available for complex factual records, settlement negotiations, and multi-party participation. Finally, for long-time PUCO practitioners, the 5 p.m. filing deadline will create a material shift in day-to-day filing practice.