OAKLAND — PG&E monthly utility bills are slated to hop higher — yet again — as a group of key decisions by state regulators loom regarding the power company’s upcoming revenue requirements.
That’s the ominous economic reality that faces PG&E customers, who already have been jolted by steadily rising electricity and gas bills in the wake of a string of deadly and catastrophic wildfires that triggered the utility’s bankruptcy due to a mountain of debt and liabilities.
On Thursday, the state Public Utilities Commission is slated to make a final decision on PG&E’s general rate case. The five-member commission is expected to choose between two options in connection with the proceeding, which authorizes changes in the amount that PG&E can harvest in the form of customer rates and monthly bills.
RELATED: PG&E electric bills soar faster than high inflation: state report
The options have something in common: Both will unleash higher monthly electricity and gas costs for PG&E customers.
“PG&E’s GRC (general rate case) application for 2023-2026 claims that it needs to make several changes to ensure the safety and reliability of its energy services,” the California PUC stated in a post on its website.
“The top drivers of PG&E’s proposed increases are inflation and significant investments in undergrounding electric lines to decrease wildfire risk,” the PUC said in the post.
The first option would increase bills for the average residential customer who receives combined electric and gas services from PG&E by $31.13 a month. Electric bills would jump by $22.37 a month while natural gas bills would increase by $8.76 a month.
An alternate proposal floated by PUC Commissioner John Reynolds would increase average residential monthly bills by $25.25 a month. Electric bills would jump by $18.59 a month while natural gas bills would increase by $6.66 a month.
The original proposal would equate to a 12.5% increase in average monthly bills for residential customers, while the alternate proposal would produce a 9.9% monthly bill increase.
PG&E’s plans for extensive burial of power lines as a way to curb contacts between PG&E equipment and adjacent trees and shrubs have drawn harsh criticism from skeptics who believe the utility could pursue far less expensive approaches.
Less costly tactics include insulating overhead electricity lines to keep them from contacting nearby vegetation. The PUC is leaning toward the less-expensive options for dealing with power lines and trees.
Oakland-based PG&E had urged the PUC to approve its plans to bury 10,000 miles of power lines.
Two PUC hearing officers, known formally as administrative law judges, have proposed a plan to bury 200 miles of power lines. The proposal from Commissioner Reynolds envisions the burial of 973 miles of power lines.
“PG&E’s general rate case proposal focuses on continued safety improvements for our customers and hometowns,” PG&E spokesperson Mike Gazda said in comments emailed to this news organization. “More than 85% of our proposed increase in revenues is for reducing risk in gas and electric operations.”
The PG&E bill changes are slated to go into effect in January 2024 and will impact bills next year, in 2025 and 2026.
Several other proposals are being considered by the PUC that could also shove PG&E bills far higher, depending on whether they are approved.
Sam Liccardo, the former mayor of San Jose who for the last several years has become a harsh critic of PG&E, said people in the Bay Area, Northern California and Central California have a right and duty to demand oversight on how PG&E uses the money it collects from its customers.
“We need greater accountability for how PG&E spends money and to ensure the money is spent in ways that benefit PG&E customers and not PG&E executives and shareholders,” Liccardo said in an interview with this news organization. “Ratepayers have a right to ask what’s in it for us.”
