Electricity Ratepayers Could See Millions In Refunds For San Onofre
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Martha Sullivan, Organizer with the Coalition to Decommission San Onofre
Truman Burns, spokesperson with the California Public Utilities Commission Division of Ratepayer Advocates
Alison St John, KPBS North County Bureau Chief
Regulators are in the early stages of figuring out how much power companies can reasonably charge ratepayers for the fiasco that led to the shut down of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Stations.
The power companies that operate the shuttered San Onofre nuclear power plant must refund ratepayers $95 million, under a proposal released this week.
SCE to Contest State Regulator’s Proposed Decision on San Onofre Nuclear Plant
Southern California Edison (SCE) is disappointed in portions of a proposed decision issued Tuesday by two administrative law judges.
Two administrative law judges with the California Public Utilities Commission propose Southern California Edison and SDG&E refund $94 million to customers.
That would be for costs incurred while the plant was shut down in 2012, and the company was exploring whether it would be feasible to restart it.
SDG&E said it is reviewing the proposal, and will submit papers to the PUC, which will make the decision on the refund next month.
$94 million sounds like a lot of money. But John Geesman, attorney for the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility, said it’s not enough.
“Ratepayers are still paying more than $80 million dollars a month for a plant that’s been abandoned,“ Geesman said, “and for the PUC to propose refunding only $94 million right now falls pretty short. “
Geesman said Southern California Edison and SDG&E have set aside more than half a billion dollars to cover what they may be required to refund customers.
Majority owner, Southern California Edison, said in a statement that it is disappointed in the proposed decision. The company disputed the finding that it should have known by May 7th of 2012 that the problems with the new steam generators were serious enough to make it unlikely the plant would ever return to normal operation.
Possible refunds for 2013 costs are still to be adjudicated in phase three of the PUC's investigation.
To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.