Senator O'Brien & Majority Leader Morelle Applaud PSC Finding Protecting Upstate Energy Ratepayers

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 7/30/2019 Senator O'Brien & Majority Leader Morelle Applaud PSC Finding Protecting Upstate Energy Ratepayers

    1/2

    THE SENATE

    Albany, NY 12247

    STATE LEGISLATURE

    OF NEW YORK

    THE ASSEMBLY

    Albany, NY 12248

    __________________________________________________________________________________________

    For Immediate Release Contact: Tom Morrisey 585--223-1800

    Wednesday, April 24, 2013 Derek Murphy 585-721-3172

    __________________________________________________________________________________________

    OBRIEN, MORELLE APPLAUD PSC FINDING

    PROTECTING UPSTATE ENERGY

    RATEPAYERS

    ALBANY, N.Y.State Senator Ted OBrien and State Assembly Majority Leader Joseph D. Morelle todayhailed a Public Service Commission (PSC) directive that puts the brakes on a plan that would require Upstateenergy ratepayers to subsidize services that only benefit the New York metro region.

    The Commission finding is in response to a proposal by Con Edison of New York and the New York Power

    Authority (NYPA) for energy generation in the event that the Indian Point nuclear plant near Peekskill closes in2015. The Con Ed/NYPA plan would distribute the cost of alternative energy generation to all New Yorkratepayers, including Upstaters who would realize no benefit from these projects.

    On April 18, 2013, the Commission agreed with critics that the cost allocation methodology should adhere tothe principle of beneficiaries pay, and that, in this case, the beneficiaries should be identified as those who

    receive the reliability benefits of the contingency plan projects. OBrien and Morelle submitted lettersprotesting the contingency plan during the Commissions deliberations.

    Because of these and other findings, the PSC directed Con Ed and NYPA to work with the New York StateEnergy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) to submit a revised proposal within 45 days.

    There is clear and long-standing precedent that only the beneficiaries of a power generation project should payfor those services, OBrien said. The proposals as originally stated would clearly have violated that precedentand penalized Upstate ratepayers in the process, adding as much as $200 million to bills paid by local familiesand businesses. I am pleased that the PSC listened to our concerns, especially considering the economic impactof rate increases in a state that already has the fourth-highest energy costs in the nation.

    (continues on second page)

  • 7/30/2019 Senator O'Brien & Majority Leader Morelle Applaud PSC Finding Protecting Upstate Energy Ratepayers

    2/2

    (continued)

    "The consequences of the contingency plan by Con Ed and NYPA were totally unacceptable for Upstaters,"Morelle said. "It is wrong to ask consumers in one part of the state to pay for services that exclusively benefitconsumers in another, and to do so sets a precedent that will have negative impacts economically andfinancially for all New Yorkers. This is not a matter of regional competition; this is a matterof simple fairness, and this is confirmed by the PSC's statements."

    In its findings, the PSC noted the following:

    "...we are mindful of the various comments that asserted upstate regions in the State would not receiveany benefit from addressing the reliability impacts associated with the closure of the IPEC facility. As aconsequence, it was further argued that these upstate regions should not be required to contribute to thepayment of the costs to implement the Indian Point Contingency Plan."

    "In general, we agree with the numerous comments that suggested the cost allocation methodologyshould adhere to the principle of beneficiaries pay, and that, in this case, the beneficiaries should beidentified as those who receive the reliability benefits of the contingency plan projects."

    OBrien and Morelle said they would continue to monitor this issue and urged that the final plan reflect thePSCs opinion with respect to project cost liability.

    -30-