You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

MSNBC: "Anti-terrorism costs hidden in utility bills" [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Bush_Eats_Beef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 06:14 PM
Original message
MSNBC: "Anti-terrorism costs hidden in utility bills"
Advertisements [?]
Anti-terrorism costs hidden in utility bills
Utilities win rate increases to recoup security costs following 9/11



"Utility companies that beefed up security after the Sept. 11 attacks are now looking to recoup those costs. Some of those costs are hard to assign, like this county sheriff guarding Flordia Power's Crystal River nuclear plant in November 2001."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6632194/

Public utility companies from sea to shining sea have spent hundreds of millions requisitioning, reviving or retro-fitting security measures in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And now these companies want their money back, most of it in the form of higher rates for their customers.

The federal government stepped in quickly after 9/11 and set precedent for allowing such rate increases. Two days after the terrorist attacks in 2001, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates rates for wholesale electricity and natural gas shipments, told companies it would approve costs to upgrade security. The commission followed up with an order that defined the expenses as “prudently incurred costs necessary to further safeguard the reliability and security of our energy and supply infrastructure.”

“From a homeland security perspective, I think you would want to make certain your critical infrastructures are protected,” said Jeffery Pillon, a staff member for Michigan’s Public Service Commission. “And if the companies, at their own initiatives, or based on some industry guidance, take action to increase security, again as long as the costs are reasonable, that would give you at least a basis for allowing those expenditures to be included in rates,” said Pillon, who also is chairman of a critical infrastructure subcommittee for the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC