Case No. 12-1571 For FirstEnergy (Mon Power and Potomac Edison) only:
- The
PSC needs to make energy efficiency investment a priority when evaluating these
kinds of projects. It’s just common
sense that we should try to reduce our energy needs first before we
require WV rate payers to pay for any new power plant capacity.
- The
PSC needs to put WV first. WV rate
payers should not be taking on new rate increases so that an Ohio-based company
can shift ownership of its power plants from state to state to increase
profits.
- This
case offers the PSC a real opportunity to move WV’s power companies away from
the financial risks of being overly dependent on a single fuel source.
- FirstEnergy has inflated the cost of the Harrison Power Station to
twice its previous book value. If the
PSC does allow some portion of the plant to be sold to WV rate payers, the PSC
needs to make sure that the sale price of the plant is reduced to its real book
value.
- Mon
Power did not seriously evaluate many possible alternatives to this coal plant;
instead, they presented a self-serving analysis that justified their decision
to purchase this plant to bail out their parent company.
- The
PSC should require the power companies to issue a request for proposals to seek
out other ways of meeting their capacity shortages, rather than accepting the
companies' analysis that purchasing power plants from affiliated companies is
the best option for ratepayers.
- FirstEnergy's
proposal did not evaluate expanding energy efficiency and demand-side
management. Nationally, investments in
energy efficiency cost an average of 3 cents per kWh saved, compared to 7.4
cents per kWh for energy generated by the Harrison plant.
Case No. 12-1655 For AEP (Appalachian Power) only: - The
PSC needs to make energy efficiency investment a priority when evaluating these
kinds of projects. It’s just common
sense that we should try to reduce our energy needs first before we
require WV rate payers to pay for any new power plant capacity.
- The
PSC needs to put WV first. WV rate
payers should not be taking on new rate increases so that an Ohio-based company
can shift ownership of its power plants from state to state to increase
profits.
- This
case offers the PSC a real opportunity to move WV’s power companies away from
the financial risks of being overly dependent on a single fuel source
- The baseline energy efficiency scenario assumed
by Appalachian Power is much weaker than what AEP is required to meet in
Ohio. The PSC should require greater
investment in energy efficiency and demand response from Appalachian Power
_______________________________________________________________________
How to comment on a case: Be sure to reference the PSC case number in your comment
(Case No. 12-1655 for Appalachian/Wheeling Power; Case No. 12-1571 for Mon
Power/Potomac Edison).
Make comments online here.
Send your comments by mail to: West Virginia Public Service Commission 201 Brooks Street Charleston, WV 25301
|
|