The amount of the surcharge, which PSEG helped determine, likely to be a linchpin in the proceedings
Tom Johnson reports for NJ Spotlight
As expected, Rate Counsel Stefanie Brand yesterday challenged the award of $300 million in ratepayer subsidies to keep PSEG Power’s three nuclear power plants open in South Jersey in a case filed with the New Jersey Appellate Division.
The subsidies, dubbed zero-emission certificates, were given to the plants last month by the state Board of Public Utilities, a decision that ignored the recommendations of Rate Counsel, the BPU’s own staff, and an outside consultant retained by the BPU. All three concluded the plants failed to meet the financial threshold to qualify for the subsidy.
The debate over the nuclear bailout is one of the more contentious issues to come before the BPU in recent years. The scheme was opposed by some environmental groups and many business interests who argued it would drive up energy prices in a state already hit by high energy costs.
No danger of shutting down
In her filing, Rate Counsel argued the commissioners, in a 4-1 split vote, awarded the subsidies despite a six-month analysis that failed to demonstrate the plants were in danger of closing and were, in fact, profitable.
Besides deeming the award arbitrary and capricious, Brand contended the rate set in legislation establishing the ZEC program is not just and reasonable, a standard set for all rates set by the BPU.
Indeed, even a couple of BPU commissioners, in approving the subsidies in April, expressed misgivings about a provision in the legislation that required them to award the entire $300 million — even if all that was not needed to keep the plants open.
A spokesman for the BPU declined comment, saying the agency does not discuss pending litigation. BPU president Joseph Fiordaliso also declined comment, when asked by an assemblyman to explain why the board approved the subsidies during a budget hearing yesterday.
Like this? Click to receive free updates
