Government Bureaucrat raising the bar on Duke/Cinergy Merger

Janine Migden-Ostrander, head of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel (a state agency), is quoted as saying the following regarding the Duke/Cinergy Merger:

Unless Cinergy can demonstrate there are benefits to rate-payers, I think there is going to be some serious opposition. (Charlotte Business Journal)

Where in the Counsel's charter does Ms. Migden-Ostrander discern that a free-enterprise activity like a merger has to result in benefits for the consumer to warrant her lack of opposition? It's understandable if she could demonstrate harm as a result of the merger, but benefits?

Isn't the very fact that the Duke/Cinergy joint-operations would have larger financial resources to assure delivery of electricity and gas a benefit in and of itself? It's meddling like this that caused the California Energy crisis.

(Full disclosure: Porkopolis is both a customer of and stockholder in Cinergy).