Southern California Edison (SCE) on Thursday responded to a early August ruling by a California Public Utilities Commission administrative law judge regarding SCE’s communication with commission officials concerning closing costs for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. SCE claimed it did not violate ex parte reporting rules except on one occasion that wasn't understood to required report until long after the meeting was held.
The ruling made by administrative law judge Melanie Darling, while not finding that any of SCE’s communications with commission officials were prohibited under the rules, found that several should have been reported, SCE noted.
However, in a reply submitted Thursday to the commission, SCE said it did not believe it engaged in any communications that were reportable under commission rules “except for one March [26] 2013 meeting which SCE voluntarily disclosed last Feb. 9 after learning new information.”
Thursday's filing is part of the commission’s proceeding regarding closure of the San Onofre nuclear plant. The judge’s ruling found that the vast majority of SCE’s communications with commission officials complied with the rules, but also found that 10 such communications should have been reported.
The official complaint accused SCE of 72 violations of ex parte reporting rules, but the 6 August California Public Utilities Commission Administrative L ruling exonerated SCE on 62 of the 72 alleged violations.
SCE also noted there was no evidence the March 2013 meeting affected the negotiation of the San Onofre settlement. Pointedly, “a declaration of a commission employee who attended the meeting confirmed that no agreement was reached.”
“SCE strives to comply with the commission's rules by exhibiting the highest standards of ethics and integrity,” said Pedro Pizarro, president of SCE.
The meeting in March 2013 was not known to be reportable under commission rules until after the fact, said Pizarro. “It was not until early 2015 that SCE learned additional information that indicated a report should be filed,” he said.
The SCE also said it had strengthened its “internal procedures” to promote future compliance with commission guidelines.
Penalties concerning the 10 violations could potentially reach $34 million, the Los Angeles Times reported early in the month. In Thursday's statement, SCE said that “parties who most vociferously seek the imposition of penalties against SCE have themselves engaged in unreported communications with decision-makers.”
“One such party is even seeking to be compensated for time spent by its personnel engaging in such communications,” said the company, noting that the rules were ambiguous and that the April 2014 settlement among six stakeholders in the settlement was unanimously approved.