I sent this response to Mr. Cupertino’s email which was published in your paper on June 28, 2011, “Who’s protecting us from Georgia Power?”
Mr. Cupertino, thanks for the mail. Let me see if I can answer your questions.
1. There is no competitive choice for electric in our state at the retail level. Many people support retail choice until they have it. This was shown in gas deregulation in our state as some of the fixed costs subsidized by industry was transferred to the residential customer as the cost causer. The Southern states opposed retail choice a decade ago for those reasons, as well as our infrastructure which supports lower rates than around the country would have been averaged up to lower the New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania rates.
2. The commission approved a rate increase late in 2010. Georgia is a growing state and continues to build its system to serve its needs. Without appropriate rate relief we would ultimately find ourselves with an out of date and underperforming utility. Again many states have ignored these issues and have each paid amounts to catch up. California is a good example here and pay a full third more in electricity rates than Georgians.
3. The municipal franchise fee line item on your bill is a pass through of charges the cities have the rights under state law to charge.
4. Environmental charges again are a pass through of changes the federal government has made to existing generation in the states to comply with law and regulations. The commission felt in an effort to show transparency of where costs come from and how they are allocated to show this line item on your bill.
5. You found one we take credit for. The commission authorized the company to begin collecting the cost of the construction of the new nuclear plants at Vogtle 3 and 4 in real time.
That is to say as the expenditures are made over the life of the construction and continues after the completion of the plant.
This will save rate-payers over $180 million in interest cost over the life of the plant. The Georgia General Assembly had previously voted this concept into state law for the current nuclear projects as well as any future nuclear construction.
The commission is aware of the impact of the costs associated with the delivery of electric power and its impacts on Georgians. Decisions short of what we have decided will not allow all of us to have more stable rates and a system that is reliable. Catch up for maintenance or new construction always costs more.
I hope this clears up some of your questions.
Stan Wise
Chairman, Georgia Public Service Commission
Atlanta, Ga.
[Stan Wise has served on the Commission since January 1995 and served as Commission Chairman in 1997, 1999, 2006 and 2011.]
