IX. Assignment of Proceeding
Geoffrey F. Brown is the Assigned Commissioner and Jeffrey P. O'Donnell is the assigned ALJ in this proceeding.
1. D.05-02-052 identified Scenario 3 as the most likely scenario.
2. Scenarios 6 and 7 replace Scenarios 3, 4 and 5 because they are based on actual rather than possible tube degradation results of the last inspections for each unit.
3. Under Scenario 6, the most probable scenario, the SGRP will be cost-effective, even at the low gas price, the $815 million SGRP cost, and an 80% capacity factor.
4. Scenario 7 shows that, although we do not believe it likely, if we add a one-year outage in 2015 to Scenario 6, the SGRP remains cost-effective at the low gas price and the $815 million SGRP cost as long as the capacity factor remains at or above approximately 85%.
5. The NPVs for Scenario 6 show the SGRP to be more cost-effective than shown in Scenario 3.
6. The NPVs for Scenario 7 show the SGRP to be more cost-effective than Scenario 4, except under the High Gas assumption at 85% and 80% capacity factors where it is only slightly less cost-effective.
7. The SGRP is cost-effective for the reasons discussed herein and in D.05-02-052.
8. The Commission is the lead agency under CEQA with respect to the environmental review of the SGRP and preparation of the Final EIR.
9. The Final EIR is competent, comprehensive, and in compliance with CEQA.
10. The Final EIR identifies activities and potential environmental impacts that are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government.
11. There are no Class I impacts from the SGRP or alternatives studied in the Final EIR.
12. The Final EIR identifies environmental effects of the SGRP and alternatives that may be mitigated or avoided.
13. The Final EIR identifies the environmentally superior alternative for the Transport Phase as the Diablo Intake Cove, and for the Removal Phase as on-site storage. No environmentally superior alternative was identified for the Staging and Installation Phases.
14. The Final EIR finds that the environmentally superior alternatives for the Transport and Removal Phases, combined with any of the studied alternatives for the Staging and Installation Phases, are superior to the no project alternative.
15. The Final EIR concludes that the SGRP, with the recommended mitigation measures, will not impose any significant impact on the environment.
16. The mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR are reasonable and feasible.
17. The MMCRP conforms to the recommendations of the Final EIR for measures required to mitigate or avoid environmental impacts of the SGRP.
18. The Final EIR represents our independent judgment regarding the environmental impact of the SGRP.
19. Nothing in the Final EIR precludes the SGRP from going forward.
20. Since we have imposed a cap on SGRP costs, any increases in SGRP costs incurred to comply with the requirements of the Final EIR fall within the cap.
21. Nothing in the Final EIR alters the cost-effectiveness of the SGRP.
22. Nothing in the Final EIR precludes the ratemaking treatment specified in D.05-02-052.
1. The mitigation measures in the Final EIR should be adopted.
2. The Commission should adopt the MMCRP.
3. The Final EIR should be certified for the SGRP, in accordance with CEQA.
4. For the reasons discussed in this decision, and in D.05-02-052, the Commission should approve the SGRP and adopt the preliminary findings in Ordering Paragraph 1 of D.05-02-052.
5. The Commission's approval of the SGRP should be contingent upon PG&E's performance of the SGRP utilizing the environmentally superior alternatives for the Transport and Removal Phases, as well as any of the studied Staging and Installation Phase alternatives, and in compliance with the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
6. The Commission's Executive Director should supervise and oversee the SGRP insofar as it relates to monitoring and enforcement of the mitigation measures described in the Final EIR.
7. The Executive Director should be allowed to delegate such duties to the Commission staff or outside staff.
8. The Executive Director should be authorized to employ staff independent of the Commission staff to carry out such functions, including, without limitation, the on-site environmental inspection, monitoring and mitigation supervision of construction of the SGRP. Such staff should be individually qualified professional environmental monitors or be employed by one or more qualified firms or organizations.
9. In monitoring the implementation of the environmental mitigation measures described in the Final EIR, the Executive Director should attribute the acts and omissions of PG&E's employees, contractors, subcontractors or other agents to PG&E.
10. PG&E should be required to comply with all orders and directives of the Executive Director concerning implementation of the environmental mitigation measures described in the Final EIR.
11. The Executive Director should not authorize PG&E to commence actual construction until PG&E has entered into a cost reimbursement agreement with the Commission for the recovery of the costs of the MMCRP described in the Final EIR including, but not limited to, special studies, outside staff, or Commission staff costs directly attributable to mitigation monitoring.
12. The Executive Director should be authorized to enter into an agreement with PG&E that provides for such reimbursement on terms and conditions consistent with this decision in a form satisfactory to the Executive Director. The terms and conditions of such agreement should be deemed conditions of approval of the application to the same extent as if they were set forth in full in this decision.
13. PG&E's right to construct the SGRP as set forth in this decision should be subject to all other necessary state and local permitting processes and approvals.
14. PG&E should be required to file a written notice in this docket, served on all parties to this proceeding, of its agreement, executed by an officer of PG&E duly authorized (as evidenced by a resolution of its board of directors duly authenticated by a secretary or assistant secretary of PG&E) to acknowledge PG&E's acceptance of the conditions set forth herein. Failure to file and serve such notice within 75 calendar days of the effective date of this decision should result in the lapse of the authority granted herein.
15. The Executive Director should file a Notice of Determination for the SGRP as required by CEQA and the regulations promulgated thereto.
16. This decision should be effective immediately so that the SGRP may proceed in a timely manner.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) for approval of its steam generator replacement program (SGRP) for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Units 1 & 2 (Diablo) is approved subject to the conditions imposed herein.
2. The maximum allowable SGRP cost (cap) is $815 million (2003 dollars) as adjusted for actual inflation and cost of capital. PG&E shall not be allowed to recover SGRP costs in excess of this amount. Our approval of the SGRP is conditioned upon PG&E's acceptance of the cap.
3. We do not intend to conduct an after-the-fact reasonableness review if the SGRP cost does not exceed $706 million (2003 dollars), as adjusted for actual inflation and cost of capital. However, we are not precluded from doing so for any reason.
4. If the SGRP cost exceeds $706 million, as adjusted for actual inflation and cost of capital, or the Commission later finds that it has reason to believe the costs may be unreasonable regardless of the amount, the entire SGRP cost shall be subject to a reasonableness review.
5. PG&E shall record in the Utility Generation Balancing Account (UGBA) the revenue requirement associated with plant additions up to the cap as of the date of operation of each unit.
6. PG&E shall include the revenue requirement associated with each unit in rates subject to refund, up to $326 million for Unit 1 and $380 million for Unit 2, on January 1 of the year following commercial operation of each unit. PG&E shall file an advice letter to request authority to implement the above rate increase, subject to refund, for each unit. The rate increase shall not take effect until and unless the advice letter is approved by the Commission.
7. After completion of the SGRP, PG&E shall file an application for inclusion of the costs thereof permanently in rates, regardless of whether the costs exceed $706 million. If a reasonableness review is performed, it shall be done in connection with the application.
8. The appropriate inflation adjustment to the $706 million reasonable cost and the $815 million cap shall be determined in the above application based on a reliable publication such as the Consumer Price Index.
9. The Commission retains the discretion to require a reasonableness review of SGRP costs, and/or to specify a different ratemaking treatment of such costs.
10. The Commission retains the discretion to determine the appropriate ratemaking treatment, and conduct a reasonableness review of costs incurred, if the SGRP is cancelled for any reason.
11. The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) is certified for the SGRP, and is certified for use by responsible agencies in considering subsequent approvals of portions thereof.
12. The Mitigation Monitoring, Compliance and Reporting Program (MMCRP) included in the Final EIR is adopted.
13. PG&E shall, as a condition of our approval of the SGRP, carry out the SGRP using the environmentally superior alternative for the Replacement Steam Generator Transport Phase and the Original Steam Generator Removal, Transport, and Storage Phase of the SGRP as identified in the Final EIR, and may utilize any alternative studied in the Final EIR for the Replacement Steam Generator Staging and Preparation Phase and the Replacement Steam Generator Installation Phase.
14. PG&E shall, as a condition of our approval of the SGRP, comply with all applicable mitigation measures as specified in the Final EIR.
15. The Commission's Executive Director shall supervise and oversee the SGRP insofar as it relates to monitoring and enforcement of the mitigation measures described in the Final EIR.
16. The Executive Director may delegate such duties to the Commission staff or outside staff.
17. The Executive Director is authorized to employ staff independent of the Commission staff to carry out such functions, including, without limitation, the on-site environmental inspection, monitoring and mitigation supervision of construction of the SGRP. Such staff shall be individually qualified professional environmental monitors or be employed by one or more qualified firms or organizations.
18. In monitoring the implementation of the environmental mitigation measures described in the Final EIR, the Executive Director shall attribute the acts and omissions of PG&E's employees, contractors, subcontractors or other agents to PG&E.
19. PG&E shall comply with all orders and directives of the Executive Director concerning implementation of the environmental mitigation measures described in the Final EIR.
20. The Executive Director shall not authorize PG&E to commence actual construction until PG&E has entered into a cost reimbursement agreement with the Commission for the recovery of the costs of the MMCRP described in the Final EIR including, but not limited to, special studies, outside staff, or Commission staff costs directly attributable to mitigation monitoring.
21. The Executive Director is authorized to enter into an agreement with PG&E that provides for such reimbursement on terms and conditions consistent with this decision in a form satisfactory to the Executive Director. The terms and conditions of such agreement shall be deemed conditions of approval of this application to the same extent as if they were set forth in full in this decision.
22. PG&E's right to construct the SGRP as set forth in this decision is subject to all other necessary state and local permitting processes and approvals.
23. PG&E shall file a written notice in this docket, served on all parties to this proceeding, of its agreement, executed by an officer of PG&E duly authorized (as evidenced by a resolution of its board of directors duly authenticated by a secretary or assistant secretary of PG&E) to acknowledge PG&E's acceptance of the conditions set forth herein. Failure to file and serve such notice within 75 calendar days of the effective date of this decision shall result in the lapse of the authority granted herein.
24. The Executive Director shall file a Notice of Determination for the SGRP as required by the California Environmental Quality Act and the regulations promulgated thereto.
25. Application 04-01-009 is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated ________, 2005, at San Francisco, California.
A.04-01-009 ALJ/JPO/jva DRAFT ATTACHMENT A LIST OF APPEARANCES | |
Marc Joseph |
Daniel W. Douglass |
|
|
(END OF ATTACHMENT A)
