Location: Missouri
By: Dick Aldrich -Missouri News Horizon
Updated: March 7, 2012
Jefferson City, MO. -- The question of whether or not consumers will help Ameren Missouri pay for the cost of a permit it needs to begin building a second nuclear power reactor in Callaway County is back before legislators at the State Capitol.
The Missouri House of Representatives' Committee on Utilities hosted a hearing Tuesday for House Bill 1316, legislation sponsored by Rep. Jeanie Riddle, R-Mokane, that would allow Ameren to recoup up to $45 million from consumers to cover the cost of the permit.
Riddle's bill allows the utility to recoup costs over a period of up to 20 years, allows for consumers to receive their money back if the utility sells or otherwise transfers its permit and it gives extra funds to the Office of Public Counsel, which represents consumers during rate cases.
Riddle told members of the committee that time is beginning to grow short for a nuclear plant to begin construction and operation. She said EPA restrictions on emissions from coal-fired power plants would effectively shut those plants down within 15 years.
"Due to the time frame it takes to construct new nuclear facilities, we need to get started now," she said. "These aging coal plants will need to start coming off-line in about 15 years, and I think we are already behind the game on replacing them."
Ameren is joined by a coalition of other power companies, including the state's electric cooperatives, in seeking new nuclear power generating capability.
The intended location of the new nuclear power reactor would be at the site of the state's only other nuclear facility, the Callaway Nuclear Generating Station near Fulton, Mo. That facility is already operated by Ameren.
Warren Wood, Ameren Missouri's vice president of regulatory and legislative affairs told committee members the utility has already invested about $25 million in preparing a permit for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a site at the Callaway plant.
He told lawmakers that the utility would not be interested in moving forward with the site permit process if it does not get approval for cost recovery from consumers. He said the utility has "slowed down" work on the early site permit process because of legislative hang-ups.
"At this point in time, we look, and there's not a clear cost recovery path," he said.
One of the groups testifying against the bill supported similar legislation on the site permit pay issue at the end of the last legislative session.
Chris Roepe, president of the Fair Energy Rate Action Fund told legislators that his group now opposes the early site permit legislation. He said getting the early site permit paid for shouldn't determine whether or not a nuclear power plant project moves forward in Missouri.
Roepe said his group can not support Riddle's bill because it lacks several of the consumer safeguards that were included in last year's final bill that ran out of time on the last day of the legislative session.
The bill allows Ameren a longer time to recoup the costs of the site permit from consumers, which would lead to the utility collecting more than $45 million from customers over the period of the collection. In a press release, Roepe's group asserted that amount could run to $115 million.
Refunds from Ameren to its customers under Riddle's bill would be up to the discretion of the Public Service Commission, which must decide whether or not Ameren spent consumers' money prudently. Under last year's legislation, refunds with interest are automatic.
And Riddle's legislation funds the Office of Public Counsel at a lower rate than last year's legislation.
The thousand-pound gorilla that was in the room Tuesday was that piece of legislation that was forged together by all the parties, including Roepe's group, on the last day of the 2011 legislative session. Sen. Mike Kehoe, R-Jefferson City, carried it in the Senate. Kehoe is sponsoring similar legislation in the Senate again this year.
Kehoe was present in the House hearing room for a while during Tuesday's proceedings. Committee member Rep. Jason Holsman, D-Kansas City, asked Roepe if his organization still supported Kehoe's legislation.
"If the utility companies would come on board and support that also, I don't think you would have any problem with us not opposing it," Roepe said. "We are not against nuclear power...it's just a matter of making sure that consumers are protected in this process."
The Missouri House of Representatives' Committee on Utilities hosted a hearing Tuesday for House Bill 1316, legislation sponsored by Rep. Jeanie Riddle, R-Mokane, that would allow Ameren to recoup up to $45 million from consumers to cover the cost of the permit.
Riddle's bill allows the utility to recoup costs over a period of up to 20 years, allows for consumers to receive their money back if the utility sells or otherwise transfers its permit and it gives extra funds to the Office of Public Counsel, which represents consumers during rate cases.
Riddle told members of the committee that time is beginning to grow short for a nuclear plant to begin construction and operation. She said EPA restrictions on emissions from coal-fired power plants would effectively shut those plants down within 15 years.
"Due to the time frame it takes to construct new nuclear facilities, we need to get started now," she said. "These aging coal plants will need to start coming off-line in about 15 years, and I think we are already behind the game on replacing them."
Ameren is joined by a coalition of other power companies, including the state's electric cooperatives, in seeking new nuclear power generating capability.
The intended location of the new nuclear power reactor would be at the site of the state's only other nuclear facility, the Callaway Nuclear Generating Station near Fulton, Mo. That facility is already operated by Ameren.
Warren Wood, Ameren Missouri's vice president of regulatory and legislative affairs told committee members the utility has already invested about $25 million in preparing a permit for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a site at the Callaway plant.
He told lawmakers that the utility would not be interested in moving forward with the site permit process if it does not get approval for cost recovery from consumers. He said the utility has "slowed down" work on the early site permit process because of legislative hang-ups.
"At this point in time, we look, and there's not a clear cost recovery path," he said.
One of the groups testifying against the bill supported similar legislation on the site permit pay issue at the end of the last legislative session.
Chris Roepe, president of the Fair Energy Rate Action Fund told legislators that his group now opposes the early site permit legislation. He said getting the early site permit paid for shouldn't determine whether or not a nuclear power plant project moves forward in Missouri.
Roepe said his group can not support Riddle's bill because it lacks several of the consumer safeguards that were included in last year's final bill that ran out of time on the last day of the legislative session.
The bill allows Ameren a longer time to recoup the costs of the site permit from consumers, which would lead to the utility collecting more than $45 million from customers over the period of the collection. In a press release, Roepe's group asserted that amount could run to $115 million.
Refunds from Ameren to its customers under Riddle's bill would be up to the discretion of the Public Service Commission, which must decide whether or not Ameren spent consumers' money prudently. Under last year's legislation, refunds with interest are automatic.
And Riddle's legislation funds the Office of Public Counsel at a lower rate than last year's legislation.
The thousand-pound gorilla that was in the room Tuesday was that piece of legislation that was forged together by all the parties, including Roepe's group, on the last day of the 2011 legislative session. Sen. Mike Kehoe, R-Jefferson City, carried it in the Senate. Kehoe is sponsoring similar legislation in the Senate again this year.
Kehoe was present in the House hearing room for a while during Tuesday's proceedings. Committee member Rep. Jason Holsman, D-Kansas City, asked Roepe if his organization still supported Kehoe's legislation.
"If the utility companies would come on board and support that also, I don't think you would have any problem with us not opposing it," Roepe said. "We are not against nuclear power...it's just a matter of making sure that consumers are protected in this process."
No comments:
Post a Comment
This is an unmoderated blog. Please be professional and respectful as you post.