.
Feedback

CPUC: PG&E, Not Customers, to Pay Majority of Costs to Upgrade Pipelines

In issuing the preliminary decision about PG&E's proposed gas pipeline safety plan, the CPUC said this is only the beginning of a permanent change that has to take place with PG&E and other pipeline operators throughout the state.

The CPUC issued a preliminary decision Friday to approve PG&E's new safety plan that would modernize its pipeline system, but PG&E will have to absorb two-thirds of the costs.

PG&E initially proposed that the upgrades to its natural gas transmission operations, which came in the wake of the 2010 San Bruno fire, would cost about $2.2 billion over several years. The utility wanted ratepayers to pick up 85 percent of the tab because the billions PG&E would be spending represents costs to meet new, industrywide standards set by the California Public Utilities Commission.

According to the plan, PG&E requested $768.7 million in rate increases through 2014 to cover initial costs. However, the CPUC only authroized $277.8 million, or 36 percent, of the amount PG&E requested because of the utility's previous mismanagement of pipeline safety.

The decision, which still has to be approved by the five-member commission, also stated:

  • PG&E shareholders will bear the costs of pressure testing pipeline for which pressure test records are missing.
  • PG&E must continue its gas pipeline record management improvement project; however, due to past deficiencies in document management, the costs of this project and the proposed new computer database may not be recovered from ratepayers.
  • PG&E’s shareholders must bear the risk of cost overruns because PG&E’s past management decisions led to the need to undertake the massive project on an expedited schedule.
  • Shareholder return on equity for all safety enhancement capital expenditures is reduced from 11.35 percent to 6.05 percent for five years.

The commenting period is now open for members of the public to respond to the CPUC's proposal. Comments by parties involved in the proceeding are due by Nov. 13, and comments from the public are due by Nov. 26.

A copy of the preliminary decision can be found on the CPUC's website.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Mateo Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bren May 19, 2013 at 06:49 pm
I see that I meant to type "...that connect us to the past," but I accidentally typedRead More "...and connect us to the past." I think my meaning came through, though. Yes, the world does not need another national chain retail store or restaurant, which is surely what they're planning to put in there.
CP May 19, 2013 at 02:22 pm
Yes Bren, agree with you....good point.....really what it seems to come down to is money vs. theRead More good of the community and richness of traditions. And all despite the Master Plan for that site in San Mateo that seems to require an ice skating rink or similar recreational facility AT THAT SITE, and all despite the fact the Ice Chalet would like to continue operations there. The Developer has made it difficult to impossible for any ice rink to operate there (tricky it seems)....so they can get a cookie cutter retail outlet in ? .....very, very sad for the youth of the community.
Bren May 17, 2013 at 10:09 am
I think the issue is much larger than whether children will experience stress. That ice rink is aRead More local institution, dating back at least to when Fashion Island was there. It's terrible for communities to lose so many landmarks and connect us to the past.
Anita Reimann April 29, 2013 at 11:43 am
Dear Ari, Thank you for your service to our community. It's wonderful that you are already making aRead More difference.