Southern California Edison (SCE) failed to consider whether shutting down the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) was cost-effective for consumers, a pro-nuclear group argued in its latest filing with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Californians for Green Nuclear Power (CGNP) filed comments Monday for CPUC’s reopening of the record on the 2014 SONGS settlement, which resulted in state ratepayers shouldering $3.3 billion of the $4.7 billion cost to shutter the plant following its permanent closure in 2013.
The group argued in its Monday filing that the company’s decision to shutter the plant, brought on by troubles with replacement steam generators, was “prudent and cost-effective for the company from a self-serving business perspective.” But the plant’s retirement did not support California’s environmental goals, it negatively impacted California’s power grid, and it raised electricity rates for most state residents, the group argued. CGNP also said that the replacement steam generator issues did not pose a safety threat to plant workers or nearby residents, among other claims. The filing was made in response to SCE’s motion to strike comments from CGNP, both of which were submitted in CPUC’s reopening of the record. SCE claims CGNP’s comments are beyond the scope of CPUC’s ruling.
SCE blamed the steam generator issues on Japanese manufacturer Mitsubishi, which the utility is suing for $7.6 billion.
SCE reached the CPUC-approved settlement following ex parte conversations between then-CPUC President Michael Peevey and SCE executive Stephen Pickett in Warsaw, Poland, where the two discussed the deal. CPUC has reopened the settlement record to determine whether the agreement is still reasonable, in light of the illegal communications. The company maintains that the secret talks had no bearing on the deal, which it believes to be fair.
