Opponents are lining up against First Energy's suspected plan of selling the Pleasants Power Station near St. Marys to MonPower and Potomac Edison, the company's West Virginia subsidiaries.
In the past week, First Energy, the electric utility that supplies power to the northern half of West Virginia, has seemed to tip its hand on multiple occasions by disclosing that the company may seek to offload the coal-fired Pleasants plant, shifting the cost and risk of that facility from company shareholders to West Virginia customers.
In documents filed with the Pubic Service Commission, the state's utility regulatory agency, First Energy listed the Pleasants plant alongside every other power stations owned or contracted by MonPower, and on Wednesday, the company's CEO Charles Jones all but admitted in an earnings call that the company would seek to sell the Pleasants plant to its subsidiary.
The Pleasants plant being named follows several weeks in which First Energy has been questioned by environmental groups and state regulatory staff members about the company's integrated resource plan, which suggested MonPower would seek to purchase another unnamed coal-fired power plant in the near future.
While the possible sale of the Pleasants plant would benefit First Energy's shareholders and is being supported by the West Virginia Coal Association, the suggestion that a West Virginia utility will seek to buy another coal-fired plant has gathered a growing list of groups that would oppose such a transaction.
The plan's critics include challengers like the Sierra Club and the West Virginia Citizen Action Group, two environmental groups, but it also consists of engineers from the PSC staff and lawyers representing some of the largest business in the state, which need huge amounts of electricity to operate.
In documents filed with the three member PSC, all of these groups raise the same types of arguments. They question whether First Energy will actually need as much electricity in the near future as its resource plan estimates. They question whether the company's cost calculations for wind and solar power are accurate and why the company doesn't actually consider energy efficiency improvements.
And ultimately, they question how MonPower purchasing the Pleasants power station from its parent company can actually be the best option for residential and industrial customers in West Virginia, who will ultimately pay the price for such an acquisition.
Many of the comments filed with the PSC, including statements by the agency's independent staff, show that many of the outside parties see First Energy's resource plan as a "thinly-disguised attempt" to justify the sale of the Pleasants plant.
Donald Walker, a PSC staff engineer, wrote that he was concerned that First Energy's resource plan is a "skewed" document that is only meant to "lay the foundation for purchasing another coal-fired generating plant," and that the company seems to be ignoring what is actually in the "ratepayer's best interest."
"The conclusions presented by the companies appear to be out-of-step with the current trend of employing renewable energy and the use of demand response and energy efficiency programs," Walker said. "These conclusions did not seem to consider the current economic status of West Virginia."
The state's Consumer Advocate Division said the plan ignores the "significant uncertainties" that face coal-fired power plants. The Sierra Club said the resource plan "draws from the same playbook" the company used to get the PSC to approve MonPower's 2013 purchase of the Harrison plant, north of Clarksburg. And lawyers with the West Virginia Energy User's Group, which represents companies that employ thousands of West Virginians, said the resource plan does not provide definitive proof that the company's findings "are, in fact, accurate."
The only positive comments offered for the plan, outside of the company's lawyers, comes from the West Virginia Coal Association that has submitted testimony in past cases seeking to preserve coal-fired power plants.
"This integrated resource plan for the companies of First Energy is most positive for the State of West Virginia and its citizens because it advocates the continued use of West Virginia coal to generate electricity to meet the needs of its customers and the acquisition of additional coal-generating assets, whenever necessary and whenever possible," Bill Raney, the Coal Association's president, wrote.
Those comments stand in contrast to the position of the other West Virginia businesses being represented by the West Virginia Energy Group, which have seen their electric rates increase dramatically in recent as the existing coal-fired power plants in West Virginia have become less competitive in the regional energy markets.
As John Auville, a PSC staff attorney, points out, the assumption that purchasing another coal-fired power plant is in the best interest of First Energy customers is contradicted by the company's own plan, which also suggested that MonPower's existing coal-fired power units would need to be partially converted to natural gas.
"The companies argue that too much reliance on any one fuel type is dangerous, yet in the end, they advocate for even further reliance on coal," Auville wrote.
In his comments, Walker highlights the fact that the sale of the Pleasants plant to MonPower would be "financially lucrative" to First Energy's executives and shareholders, since the company would be guaranteed a return from West Virginia customers, if the PSC approves the purchase.
In a tersely worded conclusion, the Sierra Club summed up First Energy's plan by suggesting that First Energy's actions aren't helping the state.
"The new regulatory landscape poses real challenges for West Virginia' s energy industry," Sierra Club's lawyers wrote, "but the companies will find no answers buried in the sand."
Reach Andrew Brown at andrew.brown@wvgazettemail.com, 304-348-4814 or follow @Andy_Ed_Brown on Twitter.