Dissenting voices both within and outside the state regulatory process got considerably louder last Thursday regarding actions by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) with several billion dollars of impact — a rate case for Southern California Edison Co. (SCE) and an upgrade of the transition to advanced metering for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E). Ironically, at this same meeting the CPUC approved nearly $400,000 in compensation to consumer groups and individuals for contributions they have made in past regulatory cases.

The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a long-time San Francisco-based utility consumer watchdog group, blasted the CPUC’s decision on the Edison rate case, alleging that it will cost ratepayers more than $2 billion during the next three years while a regulatory administrative law judge in the case had recommended a much smaller increase, which TURN estimates as $132 million.

Also on Thursday, the state regulatory commission approved a $96,715 award to TURN for its contribution in another SCE case in which the Rosemead, CA-based utility is being penalized for misreporting consumer program results in previous years to gain incentive rewards from the CPUC. TURN had asked for $107,491 in so-called “intervenor funding” to recover its costs of being a party in the Edison utility case, but the CPUC decided the consumer group was only due the $96,715 award.

Nevertheless, another five groups and individuals won similar awards for helping save consumers money in other energy cases before the CPUC. An agriculture consumer organization, Aglet Consumer Alliance, won two awards ($99,194 and $32,182) for its contributions in separate cases involving all of the major energy utilities, one being the long-term procurement plan proceeding for the major power utilities.

Separately, the CPUC’s own independent consumer unit, the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), has been active in all of the major cases as a general people’s advocate paid for as part of the state budget for the CPUC. DRA was loudly critical of the state regulatory commissioners for the PG&E metering and SCE rate case decisions.

Criticizing PG&E for changing its technology halfway through its deployment of more than 10 million smart natural gas and electricity meters, DRA complained that the combination utility’s customers now will pay more than $2 billion for the advanced metering systems.

While the regulators approved an added $467 million for the upgraded meter technology, the DRA had argued that PG&E should get no more than $411 million, noting that the utility should have to swallow the added costs related to its own alleged inefficiencies that come with switching technologies.

“Smart meters will provide benefits to customers, but they are not cost-effective if customers have to pay twice,” said DRA deputy director David Ashuckian. “During these difficult economic times the CPUC should not impose unwarranted rate increases.”

DRA argued that both the PG&E meter decision and the SCE rate case set bad precedents, particularly in the current troubled economic times facing the state and nation.

©Copyright 2009Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news reportmay not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in anyform, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.