PRC Examiner Rejects Power Plan

After listening to 17 days of testimony and reading thousands of pages of legal motions and exhibits, an independent hearing examiner at the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission has recommended the Public Service Company of New Mexico’s power replacement plan be rejected when commissioners vote on the issue sometime this spring.

In his

, Ashley Schannauer says he has determined PNM’s plan to purchase an additional 132 megawatts of coal-generated power from its San Juan Generating Station and transfer nuclear-generated electricity from its share in the Palo Verde Nuclear Plant in Arizona would “put taxpayers at risk” and that the plan’s costs “outweighed the benefits.”

“The Stipulation, as proposed, does not provide net benefits to the public and should not be approved,” Schannauer writes. It’s not clear if PNM, which plans to build a natural gas plant and has been adding solar farms to its energy portfolio, has a backup proposal.

A spokesperson for PNM sent SFR a statement Wednesday night and says the investor-owned utility is still reviewing the examiner’s recommended decision and can’t comment on its plans going forward.

“We are extremely disappointed in the hearing examiner’s recommendation. Our primary concern is to balance reliability and affordability for our customers, and this decision does not appear to support either priority,” writes Susan Sponar.

While PNM’s executive consider their options, renewable energy advocates are keeping their fingers crossed that commissioners will ultimately agree with Schannauer.

Mariel Nanasi, the executive director of New Energy Economy, which led the fight against PNM’s plan has argued that it was “hostile to the economic and environmental health of New Mexicans.”

“From the beginning, it was clear that the stipulation would harm ratepayers and all New Mexicans,” says Nanasi. “The hearing examiner evaluated the evidence, and rightly concluded that further coal investments weren’t sound, and that the public benefits lay in greater reliance on renewable energy.”

Nellis Kennedy-Howard, a Sierra Club representative, says it’s time PNM moves beyond coal.

“Rather than lock our state into a future of more dirty, expensive coal, the PRC should protect ratepayers from this risky gamble and seize this opportunity to commit to a future powered by clean, renewable energy like wind and solar,” Kennedy-Howard writes in an emailed statement. “Now, in accordance with the hearing examiner’s recommendation and with the support of thousands of New Mexico residents who have raised their voices on this critical issue, it’s time for the Public Regulation Commission to act quickly to adopt the recommendation of the hearing examiner and protect ratepayer interests as soon as possible.”

At a time when the Obama Administration is targeting coal because of its climate-altering consequences, the groups argue, to further invest in coal instead of transitioning to renewable energy is a step backwards.

“PNM seems intent on perpetuating investment in toxic assets This represents an epic failure on a global scale to address political, social, environmental, and economic injustices,” San Juan Citizen Alliance’s Mike Eisenfeld told the DeSmogBlog in March.

With PNM’s energy portfolio at a crossroads, company executives have been telling investors for months that uncertainty with its coal supplies could have a significant impact on the company’s plan and potentially impact future earnings.

Schannauer’s report was released after the stock market closed, and PNM’s price was essentially unaffected by the news, closing at $28.65, down .23 cents for the day.

Santa Fe Reporter