Missouri House panel to consider nuclear plant bill
Tuesday, February 22, 2011 | 7:17 a.m. CST;
updated 7:22 p.m. CST, Tuesday, February 22, 2011
BY
The Associated Press
JEFFERSON CITY — A Missouri House committee is preparing to consider legislation letting utilities charge electric customers for some of the costs of developing a second nuclear power plant in the state.
The measure would allow power companies to recoup the cost of applying for an early site permit from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
A group of utilities has announced it is considering seeking such a permit for a nuclear power plant in Missouri. The permit would not authorize construction, and the group has said it has not decided whether to build a plant.
MoreStory
Related Articles
The House Utilities Committee was scheduled to consider the legislation Tuesday.
A 1976 voter-approved law bars utilities from charging customers for the costs of a new power plant before it starts producing electricity.
Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.
Leave a comment
Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines
outlined below and register with our site.
You must be logged in to comment. (Our
full comment policy is here.)
- Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
- Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or
discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
- Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will
be published with every comment.
(Read why we ask for that here.)
- Don’t solicit or promote businesses.
We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see
something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.
You must be logged in to comment.
E-mail
Print
Show Me the Errors 
Comments
One promise from Ameren would fix this CWIP mess. Just guarantee that the financing ratepayer base gets first dibs on any energy the financed plant produces, and gets it at a guaranteed 'reasonable' rate: i.e. 5.5% markup over actual ongoing operating costs. Any production unused by the financing ratepayer base could be sold on the open market, no strings attached.
OK, technically that's two promises. But... put *that* to the Missouri voters and see if we don't get that project rolling. Most of us are not against the project. We just expect, as collective financiers of the project, to get something for our investment.
And it shouldn't cost $40M and 44 months to certify Callaway for a 2nd plant. It should cost maybe $5-$6M and take about a year. Anything more needs to be scrutinized as over-regulation.
(Cross-posted here and to one of the "Letters" on this subject)
Derrick: I agree on all points.
I once heard a rumor that Truman Reservoir power goes to someplace other than MO, but I have no idea if that's true or not true.
AFAIK, there are absolutely no stipulations on where, or for how much, the energy from that reservoir gets sold. But, I don't know what really happens to it.
AFAIK??????
A new nuclear plant will definitely create jobs...for oncologists.
Gregg.....oh, for heaven's sake.