August 27, 2011
		Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9005, we have reviewed the 
		proposed statutory initiative related to the generation of nuclear power 
		in California (A.G. File No. 13‑0009).
		Background
		The Role of California’s Nuclear Power Generation
		California’s electricity supplies are generated by several energy 
		sources, including natural gas, nuclear fission, wind, solar, and 
		hydropower. Historically, approximately 16 percent of the state’s 
		electricity has been generated by nuclear power plants (inside and 
		outside of the state), three-fourths of which has come from the two 
		nuclear power plants in the state—the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant 
		(Diablo Canyon) in San Luis Obispo County and San Onofre Nuclear 
		Generating Station (SONGS) in San Diego County. Both of these plants are 
		owned primarily by investor-owned utilities (IOUs). (Diablo Canyon is 
		owned by Pacific Gas and Electric [PG&E] and SONGS is owned primarily by 
		Southern California Edison.) The IOUs, in turn, are subject to 
		regulation of their electricity rates by the California Public Utilities 
		Commission.
		Unlike some energy sources, such as wind and solar that serve as an 
		intermittent source of energy, nuclear power provides “base load” 
		energy, meaning that it generally provides a relatively uninterrupted, 
		reliable power source. Because nuclear power plants generally produce 
		power around the clock, large portions of California’s electricity 
		transmission system have been engineered with the two nuclear power 
		plants’ production capacity and output in mind. The Diablo Canyon Power 
		Plant represents a significant generation resource and supports power 
		flows through some of the state’s major transmission lines. The SONGS 
		has traditionally been considered by the California Independent System 
		Operator—the independent, public-benefit corporation that manages a 
		large part of the state’s electricity grid—to be an integral part of the 
		Southern California transmission system and, therefore, an important 
		resource that helps ensure access to reliable electricity for a majority 
		of Californians.
		In February 2012, both units at SONGS were shut down. While one unit 
		was initially shut down for routine maintenance, the other unit was shut 
		down after a water leak was detected in one of the reactor’s tubes. In 
		June 2013, Southern California Edison announced the permanent shut down 
		of both units at SONGS.
		California’s “Moratorium” on New Nuclear Power Plant Development
		Since 1976, state law has allowed the permitting of new nuclear power 
		plants in the state only if the California Energy Resources Conservation 
		and Development Commission (known as the California Energy Commission or 
		CEC) determines that the federal government has identified and approved 
		a demonstrated technology for:
		
			- The construction and operation of nuclear fuel rod reprocessing 
			plants.
 
			- The permanent disposal of high-level nuclear waste.
 
		
		In effect, these two conditions have created a moratorium on the 
		construction of new nuclear power plants in California as neither of 
		these conditions has been met. Accordingly, no new nuclear plants have 
		been constructed in California in over 35 years. (State law specifically 
		exempted Diablo Canyon Power Plant and SONGS from these new 
		requirements. Because no permanent disposal site for nuclear waste is 
		now available in the United States, these facilities temporarily store 
		their nuclear waste on site, either in water or in “dry case” cement 
		casings.)
		Potential Risks Associated With Nuclear Power Generation
		Nuclear power plants present potential safety and security risks 
		generally not associated with other types of energy-generating 
		facilities. Unlike other types of power plants, each nuclear power plant 
		contains large quantities of radioactive material which, if 
		released—through natural disaster, human error, or malicious intent—may 
		cause widespread public harm. As a result, these plants are subject to 
		extensive federal and state regulatory requirements pertaining to their 
		safe operation, security, mitigation of their potential environmental 
		impacts, and the establishment of emergency response procedures in the 
		event of any mishap at a nuclear facility.
		Proposal
		This measure immediately prohibits the generation of nuclear power in 
		the state until such time as the CEC finds, and the Legislature affirms, 
		that the federal government has identified and approved a demonstrated 
		technology for:
		
			- The construction and operation of nuclear fuel rod reprocessing 
			plants.
 
			- The permanent disposal of high-level nuclear waste.
 
		
		The measure would result in the immediate shut down of the Diablo 
		Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. The plant would remain shut down until such 
		time as the conditions outlined above were met.
		Fiscal Effects
		Fiscal Effects Dependent on Certain Factors
		When the Conditions Might Be Met. As noted 
		earlier, this measure halts the operation of nuclear power plants in 
		California until such time as the CEC determines, and the Legislature 
		affirms, that certain conditions have been met. Thus, the fiscal effects 
		of this proposed initiative would depend in part upon when a federally 
		approved technology exists for the construction and operation of nuclear 
		fuel rod reprocessing plants and for the permanent disposal of 
		high-level nuclear waste. It is our understanding that it is unlikely 
		the conditions allowing the resumption of nuclear power generation in 
		the state would be met for at least many years.
		Replacement Power. According to energy 
		planners, some traditional natural gas plants (inside and outside the 
		state) likely have sufficient capacity to replace the electricity 
		currently provided by Diablo Canyon at least in the near term. However, 
		upgrades to the transmission and distribution system could be needed in 
		order to support replacement power. The magnitude of such upgrades 
		remains uncertain.
		Economic Impacts Could Affect State and Local Revenues and Costs
		This measure could have significant effects on the California economy 
		which, in turn, could impact both state and local government revenues 
		and costs.
		Increased Costs for Electricity. This 
		measure could result in an increase in electricity rates due to an 
		overall reduction in the state’s supply of electricity. The long-term 
		impact of the measure on electricity rates would largely depend on 
		whether new investments in upgrades to the transmission and distribution 
		system are needed to support replacement power.
		The increases in electricity rates under these circumstances could 
		affect state and local government revenues and costs. First, they could 
		negatively impact the California economy which, in turn, could translate 
		into a loss of revenues to the state and local government. Tax revenues 
		received by governments are affected by business profits, personal 
		income, and taxable sales—all of which in turn are affected by what 
		individuals and businesses pay for electricity. Increases in electricity 
		rates due to the measure would also directly increase state and local 
		government costs since they are large consumers of electricity.
		State Could Be Held Liable to Compensate Utilities for 
		Investment Losses. Under current state law, IOUs are 
		generally allowed to recover costs associated with their capital 
		investments through the ratemaking process. If this measure were enacted 
		and resulted in the shutdown of Diablo Canyon, it is possible that 
		ratepayers might have to compensate PG&E for some portion of its 
		investment loss, which would increase electricity rates. It is also 
		possible that either a federal or state court could find that the 
		measure’s required shutdown amounts to a “taking” of private property 
		and as such would require “just compensation for any uncompensated 
		capital costs,” which could total more than $2 billion. However, the 
		state’s potential liability in this area is uncertain.
		Reduced State and Local Financial Exposure
		From Potential Nuclear Emergencies
		Under this measure, state and local governments could avoid potential 
		future costs and loss of revenues that they might otherwise incur in the 
		event of a major release of radioactivity into the surrounding 
		environment from the nuclear power plant. Major releases of 
		radioactivity into the environment from nuclear plants have rarely 
		occurred. In part, this is likely due to the regulatory requirements 
		affecting their security and safe operation as well as building 
		standards designed to help plants withstand major natural disasters. In 
		the event that such a release of radioactivity did occur, experts in 
		this field indicate that it could result in major direct governmental 
		costs for emergency response and lost governmental revenues due to 
		widespread economic disruption.
		The immediate shutdown of Diablo Canyon under the measure could 
		therefore reduce some of the exposure of the state and nearby local 
		governments to the substantial costs and lost revenues that could 
		otherwise result from a major release of radiation. However, this 
		measure may not alleviate all of the financial exposure to the state and 
		local governments because the current lack of permanent storage options 
		for nuclear waste means that all nuclear waste will remain stored on 
		site at the plant even if its operations were shut down until the 
		federal government approves an alternative storage site.
		These potential avoidable impacts could collectively amount to 
		billions of dollars. The financial exposure of state and local 
		governments to such costs would, however, be offset to some extent by 
		federally mandated liability insurance requirements on the nuclear 
		industry as well as potential federal financial assistance in the event 
		of a major emergency. These state and local fiscal impacts, however, 
		could still be major.
		Summary of Fiscal Effects
		We estimate that this measure could have the following major fiscal 
		effects:
		
			- Potential impacts on state and local finances in the form of 
			decreased revenues and increased costs due to possible electricity 
			price increases and state liabilities. The magnitude of these 
			impacts are uncertain, but could be significant, depending in part 
			on the need for system upgrades for replacement power and whether 
			the state is liable for investment losses.
 
			- Potential avoidance of major future state and local government 
			costs and lost revenues in the rare event of a major nuclear plant 
			incident.
Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9005, we have 
			reviewed the proposed statutory initiative related to the generation 
			of nuclear power in California (A.G. File No. 13‑0009).
			Background
			The Role of California’s Nuclear Power Generation
			California’s electricity supplies are generated by several energy 
			sources, including natural gas, nuclear fission, wind, solar, and 
			hydropower. Historically, approximately 16 percent of the state’s 
			electricity has been generated by nuclear power plants (inside and 
			outside of the state), three-fourths of which has come from the two 
			nuclear power plants in the state—the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power 
			Plant (Diablo Canyon) in San Luis Obispo County and San Onofre 
			Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) in San Diego County. Both of 
			these plants are owned primarily by investor-owned utilities (IOUs). 
			(Diablo Canyon is owned by Pacific Gas and Electric [PG&E] and SONGS 
			is owned primarily by Southern California Edison.) The IOUs, in 
			turn, are subject to regulation of their electricity rates by the 
			California Public Utilities Commission.
			Unlike some energy sources, such as wind and solar that serve as 
			an intermittent source of energy, nuclear power provides “base load” 
			energy, meaning that it generally provides a relatively 
			uninterrupted, reliable power source. Because nuclear power plants 
			generally produce power around the clock, large portions of 
			California’s electricity transmission system have been engineered 
			with the two nuclear power plants’ production capacity and output in 
			mind. The Diablo Canyon Power Plant represents a significant 
			generation resource and supports power flows through some of the 
			state’s major transmission lines. The SONGS has traditionally been 
			considered by the California Independent System Operator—the 
			independent, public-benefit corporation that manages a large part of 
			the state’s electricity grid—to be an integral part of the Southern 
			California transmission system and, therefore, an important resource 
			that helps ensure access to reliable electricity for a majority of 
			Californians.
			In February 2012, both units at SONGS were shut down. While one 
			unit was initially shut down for routine maintenance, the other unit 
			was shut down after a water leak was detected in one of the 
			reactor’s tubes. In June 2013, Southern California Edison announced 
			the permanent shut down of both units at SONGS.
			California’s “Moratorium” on New Nuclear Power Plant Development
			Since 1976, state law has allowed the permitting of new nuclear 
			power plants in the state only if the California Energy Resources 
			Conservation and Development Commission (known as the California 
			Energy Commission or CEC) determines that the federal government has 
			identified and approved a demonstrated technology for:
			
				- The construction and operation of nuclear fuel rod 
				reprocessing plants.
 
				- The permanent disposal of high-level nuclear waste.
 
			
			In effect, these two conditions have created a moratorium on the 
			construction of new nuclear power plants in California as neither of 
			these conditions has been met. Accordingly, no new nuclear plants 
			have been constructed in California in over 35 years. (State law 
			specifically exempted Diablo Canyon Power Plant and SONGS from these 
			new requirements. Because no permanent disposal site for nuclear 
			waste is now available in the United States, these facilities 
			temporarily store their nuclear waste on site, either in water or in 
			“dry case” cement casings.)
			Potential Risks Associated With Nuclear Power Generation
			Nuclear power plants present potential safety and security risks 
			generally not associated with other types of energy-generating 
			facilities. Unlike other types of power plants, each nuclear power 
			plant contains large quantities of radioactive material which, if 
			released—through natural disaster, human error, or malicious 
			intent—may cause widespread public harm. As a result, these plants 
			are subject to extensive federal and state regulatory requirements 
			pertaining to their safe operation, security, mitigation of their 
			potential environmental impacts, and the establishment of emergency 
			response procedures in the event of any mishap at a nuclear 
			facility.
			Proposal
			This measure immediately prohibits the generation of nuclear 
			power in the state until such time as the CEC finds, and the 
			Legislature affirms, that the federal government has identified and 
			approved a demonstrated technology for:
			
				- The construction and operation of nuclear fuel rod 
				reprocessing plants.
 
				- The permanent disposal of high-level nuclear waste.
 
			
			The measure would result in the immediate shut down of the Diablo 
			Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. The plant would remain shut down until 
			such time as the conditions outlined above were met.
			Fiscal Effects
			Fiscal Effects Dependent on Certain Factors
			When the Conditions Might Be Met. As 
			noted earlier, this measure halts the operation of nuclear power 
			plants in California until such time as the CEC determines, and the 
			Legislature affirms, that certain conditions have been met. Thus, 
			the fiscal effects of this proposed initiative would depend in part 
			upon when a federally approved technology exists for the 
			construction and operation of nuclear fuel rod reprocessing plants 
			and for the permanent disposal of high-level nuclear waste. It is 
			our understanding that it is unlikely the conditions allowing the 
			resumption of nuclear power generation in the state would be met for 
			at least many years.
			Replacement Power. According to energy 
			planners, some traditional natural gas plants (inside and outside 
			the state) likely have sufficient capacity to replace the 
			electricity currently provided by Diablo Canyon at least in the near 
			term. However, upgrades to the transmission and distribution system 
			could be needed in order to support replacement power. The magnitude 
			of such upgrades remains uncertain.
			Economic Impacts Could Affect State and Local Revenues and Costs
			This measure could have significant effects on the California 
			economy which, in turn, could impact both state and local government 
			revenues and costs.
			Increased Costs for Electricity. This 
			measure could result in an increase in electricity rates due to an 
			overall reduction in the state’s supply of electricity. The 
			long-term impact of the measure on electricity rates would largely 
			depend on whether new investments in upgrades to the transmission 
			and distribution system are needed to support replacement power.
			The increases in electricity rates under these circumstances 
			could affect state and local government revenues and costs. First, 
			they could negatively impact the California economy which, in turn, 
			could translate into a loss of revenues to the state and local 
			government. Tax revenues received by governments are affected by 
			business profits, personal income, and taxable sales—all of which in 
			turn are affected by what individuals and businesses pay for 
			electricity. Increases in electricity rates due to the measure would 
			also directly increase state and local government costs since they 
			are large consumers of electricity.
			State Could Be Held Liable to Compensate Utilities 
			for Investment Losses. Under current state law, IOUs 
			are generally allowed to recover costs associated with their capital 
			investments through the ratemaking process. If this measure were 
			enacted and resulted in the shutdown of Diablo Canyon, it is 
			possible that ratepayers might have to compensate PG&E for some 
			portion of its investment loss, which would increase electricity 
			rates. It is also possible that either a federal or state court 
			could find that the measure’s required shutdown amounts to a 
			“taking” of private property and as such would require “just 
			compensation for any uncompensated capital costs,” which could total 
			more than $2 billion. However, the state’s potential liability in 
			this area is uncertain.
			Reduced State and Local Financial Exposure
			From Potential Nuclear Emergencies
			Under this measure, state and local governments could avoid 
			potential future costs and loss of revenues that they might 
			otherwise incur in the event of a major release of radioactivity 
			into the surrounding environment from the nuclear power plant. Major 
			releases of radioactivity into the environment from nuclear plants 
			have rarely occurred. In part, this is likely due to the regulatory 
			requirements affecting their security and safe operation as well as 
			building standards designed to help plants withstand major natural 
			disasters. In the event that such a release of radioactivity did 
			occur, experts in this field indicate that it could result in major 
			direct governmental costs for emergency response and lost 
			governmental revenues due to widespread economic disruption.
			The immediate shutdown of Diablo Canyon under the measure could 
			therefore reduce some of the exposure of the state and nearby local 
			governments to the substantial costs and lost revenues that could 
			otherwise result from a major release of radiation. However, this 
			measure may not alleviate all of the financial exposure to the state 
			and local governments because the current lack of permanent storage 
			options for nuclear waste means that all nuclear waste will remain 
			stored on site at the plant even if its operations were shut down 
			until the federal government approves an alternative storage site.
			These potential avoidable impacts could collectively amount to 
			billions of dollars. The financial exposure of state and local 
			governments to such costs would, however, be offset to some extent 
			by federally mandated liability insurance requirements on the 
			nuclear industry as well as potential federal financial assistance 
			in the event of a major emergency. These state and local fiscal 
			impacts, however, could still be major.
			Summary of Fiscal Effects
			We estimate that this measure could have the following major 
			fiscal effects:
			
				- Potential impacts on state and local finances in the form of 
				decreased revenues and increased costs due to possible 
				electricity price increases and state liabilities. The magnitude 
				of these impacts are uncertain, but could be significant, 
				depending in part on the need for system upgrades for 
				replacement power and whether the state is liable for investment 
				losses.
 
				- Potential avoidance of major future state and local 
				government costs and lost revenues in the rare event of a major 
				nuclear plant incident.
 
			
			 
		
		
Return to Propositions
Return to Legislative Analyst's Office Home Page