After more than 900 public comments were submitted regarding proposed rules for how the West Virginia Department of Commerce will certify microgrids and high impact data centers in the state, the joint Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee approved several changes to the proposals during a meeting Wednesday.
The proposed rules relate to last year’s passage of House Bill 2014, which created the certified microgrid program and set policies for how certain data centers that come to the state may operate. In this rule-making process, the Department of Commerce was tasked specifically with creating rules for how the secretary should approach certifying microgrids and high impact data centers and what information should be considered while doing so.
Throughout a public comment period in December 2025, 935 individual comments were submitted from residents who held concerns over portions of the rule as well as the legislation as a whole. Nicholas Preservati, who serves as the deputy secretary for the Department of Commerce, told lawmakers that the agency split public comments into five main categories: economic concerns, environmental concerns, public transparency concerns, local control concerns and infrastructure concerns.
According to a summary created by the Department of Commerce, a “significant number” of the comments submitted did not apply to the rules that were under review. Instead, per the agency, they applied to the legislation as a whole, which has already been enacted and stands as law. The rule-making process cannot change the law as it’s written; it can only clarify how certain portions of it will be applied.
Preservati said he and others at Commerce read through all of the comments and used them to inform changes to the rule.
Changes proposed by the Department of Commerce and approved by lawmakers Wednesday included adding language clarifying that any high impact data center or microgrid must follow state and federal environmental laws, redefining “nearly contiguous property” for parcels within the districts and giving explicit authority to the Secretary of Commerce to request any information from applicants and work with other agencies before certifying, among other things.
Another change — perhaps the most material one — was the inclusion of how developers and the Department of Commerce will handle a potential “inordinate burden” posed by the potential high impact data center or microgrid.
Per the approved rules, developers who apply for certification must flag if their proposed project could place a significant and unreasonable burden on nearby property owners due to its location, environmental risks it may bring, the proximity to schools, homes or historic sites and more. Developers will have to share how they plan to offset those potential harms and the Department of Commerce will have the right to independently verify or challenge claims made by the developers.
In committee on Wednesday, Preservati — who also serves as the director of the state’s Office of Energy — said the inordinate burden language was added in response to numerous public comments from individuals concerned that HB 2014 strips local governments from having the power to regulate how certified microgrids or data centers operate within their communities.
“There [were] a lot of public comments requesting, you know, how can we do this? Where’s the public? Where are they involved, and how are they protected?” Preservati told the committee. “So that was added in response to that.”
Sen. Patricia Rucker, R-Jefferson, and others thanked Preservati for including the language. While Del. Kayla Young, D-Kanawha, said she appreciated its inclusion, she shared concerns about how it was framed.
Based on the rules, the developers are the only ones responsible for flagging potential risks that their projects could bring. She said this could be especially concerning since the public is not required to be made aware of developers seeking certification or the projects they are proposing.
“Is it concerning?” Young asked Preservati. “What are your thoughts on the fact that the person who the burden is being placed upon is unaware of this entirely and the person making the determination (that something could be a burden) is the petitioner, not the person with whom the burden would be on?”
Preservati said that the Department of Commerce “recognized” that concern. The letter of intent to become certified as well as documents provided by developers seeking certification are kept confidential on purpose, he said, so it’s expected that the general public will not know whether an “inordinate burden” is coming to their communities.
But, he said, developers will be expected to include any things that “the average person should be able to recognize” — like schools and certain topography or environmental features — could be affected by the developments. If they don’t, he continued, the secretary has the “authority unilaterally” to investigate all claims made.
“We added that as part of this discussion to create a second check and balance for the secretary,” Preservati said.
Young proposed an amendment to the rules that would have required the Department of Commerce to create a redacted version of filings for the public to view and access when a developer sought out certification. She said this was necessary so members of the public would have enough information to appeal a certification or voice concerns about it before it became finalized.
Redacted information would have included confidential business information, which has become a key tension point in several communities as developers seek permits (separate from the certification process) to construct microgrids and data center complexes.
Her amendment addressed several concerns shared in public comments submitted during the rule-making process as well as comments from numerous residents who live in communities where data centers are being proposed. From Mingo County to Tucker County, residents have been clear that they feel the state is not making a good-faith effort to be transparent during these proceedings.
Per Young’s amendment, it would have been up to Commerce to decide what information qualified as confidential business information and what could be made public.
Preservati, when asked his thoughts on the proposed amendment, did not support it.
He said that the information that would be redacted is owned by the company — not the Department of Commerce. If the public was able to view the information, he continued, it could impact what developers were willing to share with the state agency and lead to professional competition that could raise prices and potentially stop a company from seeking out parcels in West Virginia.
“I don’t think it’s good practice for the [Department of Commerce] to be determining what’s confidential and what’s not. That should be the determination of the company,” Preservati said. “(Public posting of information) would have a chilling effect on companies … which could create a competitive disadvantage, which is a very significant issue for many of these data centers.”
Young’s amendment failed via voice vote.
With the approval from the joint Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee, the rules will now be turned into legislation that will likely be considered as part of a future rule-making bundle for the Department of Commerce this legislative session. The bundle will go through the regular legislative committee process and need to be approved by both chambers of the Legislature before becoming law.
This article originally appeared on West Virginia Watch.
West Virginia Watch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. West Virginia Watch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Leann Ray for questions: info@westvirginiawatch.com.
