The law requires that SDG&E respond to any formal inquiries by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), or by groups like UCAN. This means that SDG&E must fully, and truthfully, answer all requests for internal documents involving their costs. In fact, CPUC "Rule One" states that a utility executive shall never mislead the court through a "false statement of fact or law" (read Rule #1 here).

UCAN discovered in late May that SDG&E had intentionally withheld documents ... important documents. SDG&E’s secret Utility of the Future plan detailed a massive, system-wide reorganization of the utility’s resources that will potentially cut SDG&E’s annual operating costs by millions of dollars by deploying new technologies.

Normally, UCAN would applaud such efforts to cut costs. But SDG&E kept the plan secret to avoid having to use those savings to reduce its record-breaking $1.5 billion rate increase request. SDG&E figured if it could keep the plan under wraps until after the CPUC rate review, it could hold on to most of those savings.

UCAN’s discovery ensures that SDG&E’s deception won’t work. And UCAN will argue that those savings will need to be given back to customers through lower rates. In hearings expected to occur this summer, UCAN’s analysts will be explaining how SDG&E’s rate request is a sham and that SDG&E has the ability – like every other company in San Diego – to use new technologies and good management to keep costs down.

Thank UCAN’s financial bloodhounds for sniffing out this vile deception, and stay tuned to our Web site for further developments. Even the utility-friendly CPUC will have trouble ignoring such a blatant violation of the law; so much so that UCAN is considering pushing for penalties.

There’s just one problem with the SDG&E campaign: none of it is true.

UCAN’s exhaustively researched audit of internal memos and e-mails shows that SDG&E’s top management directed its employees to intentionally mislead the public about the need for the $1.3 billion power line. The message: Instill a fear of impending rolling blackouts, skyrocketing price hikes, and energy shortages.

SDG&E spent $16 million of your money hiring costly technical and financial consultants whose sole job was to create reams of questionable studies and data to justify the project. Then it spent another $3 million of your money, so far, to spread the message.

In court hearings this summer, UCAN will prove that SDG&E’s top management is fully aware of at least 21 cheaper energy solutions that are available as an alternative to STP. UCAN will further prove that these alternative sources (many of them green, renewable energy sources such as solar) have the ability to generate 10 to 15 times as much power as the region will need by the year 2017. Learn more at our Web site at www.ucan.org.

Those of you who are longtime UCAN members will recall that in 2001, SDG&E teamed up with Sempra to help game California's electricity market. By law, SDG&E is not allowed to make a profit selling electricity. In 2001, the utility had large contracts guaranteeing the ability to buy electricity at 3.5¢ a unit. However, instead of selling the electricity at 3.5¢, SDG&E used its affiliate company Sempra Energy, to sell that cheap power for as much as 30¢ a unit. SDG&E then re-purchased the electricity it gave away to Sempra Energy at much higher rates, bilking its customers out of nearly a billion dollars in just a few months. Sempra's tactics helped spur the phony energy shortages that caused the rolling blackouts.

In 2003, UCAN sued SDG&E and Sempra, and after years of costly court battles, we successfully returned $350 million to San Diego ratepayers, but Sempra still made hundreds of millions on these blatantly greedy and legally questionable trades.

Four faulty reasons SDG&E and Sempra are putting forward to justify construction of STP If approved, SDG&E's Sunrise Transmission Project (STP) will cost ratepayers $3.7 billion more than UCAN's proposal. For a more in-depth analysis of UCAN's findings, visit our Web site and click on "Energy."

False Argument #2: "The law requires that SDG&E supply San Diego with 20% "green" or renewable energy from earth-friendly sources, and STP is the only way this can be accomplished."

UCAN’s expert evaluation shows that adequate renewable power can be brought in over existing powerlines. Moreover, UCAN recommends a San Diego-based idea for renewable power that wouldn’t require importing clean power.

False Argument #3: "Without STP, San Diego will be plunged into rolling blackouts by 2010."

This statement is absolutely false. SDG&E’s own records show that it has numerous and less expensive options for ensuring reliability. Moreover, the state Independent System Operator’s analysis confirms UCAN’s assessment that the line isn’t needed before 2018. UCAN has identified 10-15 times as much power as SDG&E will need by 2017 through other sources, such as the Advanced Metering Initiative.

False Argument #4: "STP saves money."

In perhaps the most stunning part of UCAN’s findings, not only does STP not save, but it actually costs ratepayers some $93 million more each year for 40 years ($3.7 billion) than UCAN’s alternative.

In nearly all of its arguments against STP, UCAN has bolstered its own expert testimony and analysis with SDG&E’s own incriminating documents, or those of the utility-friendly California Independent System Operator. It discloses SDG&E’s potential profits from the proposed project (a cool $780 million!) which drives the utility to pursue a controversial boondoggle, despite the factual weaknesses of its application.

In response to STP, UCAN has offered an alternative proposal that costs less than 10% of SDG&E’s plan while delivering billions of dollars in consumer benefits.

UCAN’s proposals rely on a full spectrum of cheap and readily available energy solutions, including: performance improvements to existing local electric generation facilities; using distributed generation; eliminating energy waste at existing facilities; developing localized "peaker" plants that are run only during times of peak energy demand; using locally-based photo-voltaics (solar energy), and initiating practical demand management programs. Together, these simple initiatives will produce more than 400 Megawatts of power, equalling 10 to 15 times the amount needed to supply San Diego and southern Orange County through the Year 2017.

Are you trapped with a bad mobile phone contract? If so, there may be a way out … UCAN’s Fraud Squad has unearthed a cornucopia of creative ways to break a cellular contract at our Web site. To learn what they are, visit our complaint page or click on the image at right. Or, if you are a member, give us a call at our complaint hotline at (619) 881-UCAN. We’ll give you advice on your rights and suggest some decent alternative phone plans. It’s another great members-only service from UCAN.

LIKE WHAT YOU'VE BEEN READING? JOIN UCAN!