Scant public comments
Three weeks of PRC hearings start Monday on PNM’s 14.4% rate hike request
Regulators on Monday are set to kick off three weeks of hearings on Public Service Company of New Mexico’s requested 14.4 percent rate hike, which has been causing controversy since shortly after it was first unveiled in late 2014.
However, few people showed up Thursday morning for an open public comment session the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission held on PNM’s proposal.
The 20 participants were mostly from grass-roots organizations that oppose the utility’s request for $123.5 million in new annual revenue, starting in August. PNM says most of that money would pay for $655 million in investments it’s made in the electric system since 2010, the last time it received a rate increase.
But environmental and consumer groups say PNM is asking for too much, and they oppose its efforts to shift more of the rate burden onto residential and commercial customers and away from large industrial and institutional users.
About 20 organizations are intervening in the case, with 46 witnesses expected to testify during the hearings.
Thursday’s session, however, was the only opportunity for oral public comment, and it lasted just 45 minutes.
The low turnout may reflect confusion among opponents, who are planning a protest against PNM on Monday at the PRC when the rate case begins, said Camilla Feibelman, executive director of the Sierra Club Rio Grande chapter.
“Most people are coming to the rally on Monday, and I believe many are mistakenly thinking that’s when public comments will be accepted by the PRC,” Feibelman said.
But given the packed schedule for testimony in the case, PRC hearing examiner Carolyn Glick said no more oral public comments will be accepted, although written comments will be.
Many of Thursday’s participants spoke against most of PNM’s rate proposals, particularly its request to raise the fixed monthly charge on residential bills by about 160 percent, from $5 to $13. PNM says that’s needed to help pay for fixed costs, which remain constant despite declining growth in electric consumption from energy efficiency programs.
But AARP New Mexico representative Leonel Garza said that will disproportionately impact senior citizens and disabled people, who live on fixed incomes.
“It would particularly affect the most vulnerable,” he said.
Others criticized PNM efforts to recover $163.5 million it invested to acquire ownership of 64 megawatts of capacity at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Arizona, as well as investments in new pollution controls at the coalfired San Juan Generating Station near Farmington that are not required under state or federal regulations.
Some also complained that PNM’s request to raise its return on equity, or the amount PNM is allowed to earn in profit, from 10 percent now to 10.5 percent after August as unfair to ratepayers.
Carla Sonntag, however, of the New Mexico Utility Shareholders Association defended PNM.
“PNM has made significant investments in the electric system since its last rate case in 2010,” Sonntag said. “It needs to be able to capture and recover those costs while remaining competitive as an electric utility.”