You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to myAJC.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and bonus content- exclusively for subscribers. Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks

X

Welcome to myAJC.com

This subscriber-only site gives you exclusive access to breaking news, in-depth coverage, exclusive interactives and bonus content.

You can read free articles of your choice a month that are only available on myAJC.com.

Kempner: Will Georgia energy regulators roll over for a tummy rub?


See if you can work out a deal.

That’s essentially what state employees were urged to do with Georgia Power on the question of who should pay for massive overruns tied to the company’s still unfinished nuclear expansion.

On Oct. 28, staffers for the elected Georgia Public Service Commission are supposed to report whether they found common ground with a company that basically has claimed perfection in leading a project that went way off course.

At stake is whether customers eventually will see their monthly bills rise to pay all the $1.7 billion in overruns for Georgia Power’s share of the Plant Vogtle expansion near Augusta.

The project, which the company lobbied for and confidently predicted it would complete smoothly, is more than three years behind schedule.

The PSC has final say over which costs are reasonable and prudent and therefore can be passed along by Georgia Power to customers. There’s never been any question that appropriate construction costs will eventually be baked into bills. But should customers should get saddled with all of the now-blown budget?

The PSC earlier this year asked staff to come up with an answer and get Georgia Power on board. (The company recently asked officials to extend negotiations to Oct. 28.) If there’s no deal, the commissioners could put off a vote, ask staff to keep negotiating or hold hearings anyway and make a decision on their own.

Already, there are some stark costs now forecast.

Like paying 85 already-hired nuclear operators for years of “busy work” while they await completion of long-delayed reactors, according to a filing by the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, a critic of the project.

Or Georgia Power making hundreds of millions of dollars in extra profit specifically because the project is going far over budget. (The state lets the company pocket profits based on the cost of what it builds.)

Georgia Power had earlier assured regulators that it could handle the project’s risks. But the company says the potential for problems was known when the state gave it the OK to build one of the first new U.S. nuclear power plants in decades.

The company is essentially claiming it has been faultless on the project.

“The new units could not have been built for less money or in less time than it has taken,” Georgia Power CEO Paul Bowers wrote earlier this year in a letter to the PSC.

State consultants and staffers surely disagree. In past testimony they’ve been critical of a mess of problems, including design delays, years of delays in nailing down a specific, detailed integrated schedule for the project and long-running quality and monitoring issues with fabricating parts of the project off-site, as Georgia Power had insisted.

Georgia Power refers to the big overruns and delays as “cost and schedule adjustments.” Sort of like it’s offering chiropractic assistance to its customers’ collective wallets.

Residential customers already pay an average of about $100 a year just for project financing and Georgia Power’s profits on the financing. And bills are expected to rise as construction costs are rolled in.

I asked Georgia Power a series of questions about the ongoing negotiations and the company’s stance. A spokesman emailed me back one sentence that “We believe all costs to date have been prudently spent …”

Just for context, here’s how things often go with Georgia Power when it appears before the PSC on some projects and rate cases.

A) The power company says it needs a big pot of money.

B) The PSC says “Really?”

C) The power company says, “Absolutely.”

D) The power company gets a bit less than it’s opening request, which allows the PSC to claim it didn’t roll over like a puppy hoping to get its tummy rubbed.

By the way, that’s pretty much what appears to be happening in South Carolina, where another power company launched into the same kind of nuclear expansion and has experienced pretty much the same mess.

In that state, South Carolina Electric & Gas agreed that instead of passing along all of its latest $852 million overrun to customers, it would eat $20.5 million, or a mere 2.4 percent. It also agreed to ease its rate of return ever so slightly.

I’m sure Georgia Power would like that deal. In the past it has urged Georgia to do as South Carolina does.

Stan Wise is a Georgia PSC commissioner who has treated Georgia Power tenderly in the past.

He told me he considers the South Carolina example “a good start.” But he said if a settlement is reached in Georgia “I believe it would lean a little bit more toward ratepayers’” favor.

What are the chances staff will negotiate a deal with Georgia Power?

“Fifty-fifty,” he said.

In the meantime, Wise said, Georgia Power consultants have met privately with him in recent weeks to push their points. (I’m told PSC rules don’t bar commissioners from taking part in such conversations when there have yet to be hearings.)

When its own money is at risk, Georgia Power is good at covering its bases.



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Business

Woodward Academy: Q&A with visual arts teacher Andy Cunningham

Andy Cunningham finds it strange to say out loud that he’s worked for Woodward Academy for 32 years. When he joined the city’s oldest private college preparatory school in 1985, he had no plan to be a high school teacher. Cunningham, who holds a bachelor’s degree and MFA from Georgia State University, was the first black male on faculty...
Executives believe in collaboration, balance

The leaders of the top small, midsize and large workplaces shared what makes them proud and advice for companies trying to improve their corporate culture. Answers have been edited for brevity and clarity. Q: What are key components of the company’s culture? Pat Flood, regional operating partner, Supreme Lending’s Southeast region: Our...
Woodward Academy: Top Large Workplace

Students and faculty whiz around President Stuart Gulley in the foyer of the light-filled renovated Thalia N. Carlos Science Center, which re-opened in 2016 at Woodward Academy in College Park. During a change in classes, Gulley stops a student dressed in a blue blazer and khakis, Woodward’s school uniform, and brags about his success in a recent...
What AutomationDirect.com employees say

AutomationDirect.com ADC provides a spectacularly positive work environment and provides a frequent and detailed vision for the company! ADC is, hands-down, the best place I have ever worked! I am given complete freedom in deciding how to execute my work and the company provides the best resources to get the job done. The company culture is most inclusive...
AutomationDirect.com: Q&A with Leisa Cudworth in product management

Leisa Cudworth often uses her lunch hour to exercise. It’s easy for her to work up a sweat since AutomationDirect.com has onsite exercise programs and facilities. “You get to do it at lunch or different times (of the day), so when evening comes, you get to go home to your family,” she said. Cudworth, who has worked her way from inside...
More Stories