1091.5.
(a) Upon application to the commission for ratepayer funding, or reopening of an existing application for ratepayer funding, for the relicensing of a nuclear fission thermal powerplant with a generation capacity of 50 megawatts or greater by the federal United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the commission shall require the applicant electrical corporation operating the nuclear fission thermal powerplant to submit a detailed study of the project needs and costs in order to assess the cost-effectiveness of the continued operation of the nuclear fission
thermal powerplant.(b) The study shall include, but is not limited to, all of the following areas of concern for the relicensing period:
(1) The effect of the nuclear fission thermal powerplant on system reliability and the affordable supply of electricity, including planned provisions for emergency operations and unplanned shutdowns as well as the costs of replacement power.
(2) The costs attributable to major disruptions in electrical generation due to aging or major seismic events, including any uncompleted cost assessments required pursuant to paragraph (8) of subdivision (a) of Section 25303 of the Public Resources Code, that may require repair,
replacement, or retrofit in excess of fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) at the nuclear fission thermal powerplant.
(3) The costs of responding to, or mitigating for, any new state or federal for requirements that have arisen or are anticipated to become enforceable during the period of the license extension, retrofits, or modifications that may arise from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Near Term Risk Task Force requirements pursuant to commission document SECY-11-0137: Prioritization of Recommended Actions to be Taken in Response
to Fukushima Lessons Learned, as that document may be subsequently amended.
(4) Potential costs and impacts associated with current and accumulating high-level radioactive waste and its ongoing storage at the nuclear fission thermal powerplant during the relicensing period as necessitated by changes in the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s revised Waste Confidence policy.
(5) Potential costs associated with mitigation or alternatives to the use of once-through cooling at the nuclear fission thermal powerplant as required by state or federal law
revisions mandated by the State Water Resources Control Board.
(6) Potential costs associated with expanding and maintaining emergency planning zones in compliance with state or federal regulations the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Near Term Task Force requirements pursuant to commission documents SECY-11-0137: Prioritization of Recommended Actions to be Taken in Response to Fukushima Lessons Learned and SECY-12-0025: Proposed Orders and Requests for Information in Response to Lessons Learned From Japan’s March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami, as those documents may be subsequently amended.
(7) Costs
associated with achieving compliance with requirements for a federal consistency certification granted by the California Coastal Commission to the electrical corporation, required for the relicensing of the nuclear fission thermal powerplant by the federal United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(c) The commission shall make the study publicly available on its Internet Web site and shall independently review the study to assess the cost-effectiveness of the continued operation of the nuclear fission thermal powerplant.