Critics challenge PSC ruling

Ruling saddles ratepayers with $2 billion cost, they say

Posted 1/2/19

State regulators have hit 727,000 ratepayers with a $2 billion nuclear bill.

That’s the belief of the environmentalist groups Friends of the Earth and Sierra Club.

The groups say the state …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Subscribe to continue reading. Already a subscriber? Sign in

Get 50% of all subscriptions for a limited time. Subscribe today.

You can cancel anytime.
 

Please log in to continue

Log in

Critics challenge PSC ruling

Ruling saddles ratepayers with $2 billion cost, they say

Posted

State regulators have hit 727,000 ratepayers with a $2 billion nuclear bill.
That’s the belief of the environmentalist groups Friends of the Earth and Sierra Club.
The groups say the state Public Service Commission ruling on who pays for $7 billion “wasted” by SC Electric & Gas on the nuclear project “abused customers ... with an unfair deal.”
Friends Spokesman Tom Clements challenged the PSC’s December ruling as it offers:
• No $1,000 rebate to ratepayers as promised by Dominion Energy in its bid to takeover SCE&G and its owners at Lexington County-based SCANA.
• No refund of $2 billion charged ratepayers for nuclear financing costs.
• Requires ratepayers to pay an additional $2 billion in abandonment costs – 3% more on their monthly power bills for 20 years.
• Gives SCE&G or its eventual owners a profit of 9.9% Return on Equity from increased power rates.
• Incorrectly avoided finding SCE&G “imprudent” in the way it managed the $9 billion nuclear failure.
“The PSC order falls far short of adequately protecting customers of SCE&G,” Clements said.
The Chronicle has asked Jocelyn Boyd of the PSC, Eric Boomhower of SCE&G and Nanette Edwards of the Office of Regulatory Staff for their response.
 The PSC order includes a list of limited “conditions,” Clements said. 
“The ruling disallows construction costs incurred after March 12, 2015, and finds project abandonment to have been ‘prudent’ but fails to clearly explain why that date was chosen. 
“The PSC twisted itself into a knot to avoid calling any part of spending on the project to be ‘imprudent,’ a finding that is essential.”
 Speaking for Friends of the Earth, Clements called the allotment of costs “a bad deal for ratepayers, who will be saddled with more than an additional $2 billion in costs over 20 years.”
Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club filed a complaint with the PSC last June for all costs of the project to be returned to ratepayers.
Claimants said the PSC also approved a takeover by Dominion Energy of SCANA, parent company of SCE&G.

PSC, ratepayers

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here