SDG&E says single larger undergrounding upgrade can halve long‑term cost in example
Loading...
Summary
SDG&E presented a conceptual example showing a $2.5M single integrated undergrounding (larger conductor) vs. $4.7M if the work were done twice; SDG&E cautioned the figures are rough order‑of‑magnitude estimates and said local engineering judgment and RDF remain relevant.
SDG&E used a concrete illustrative case to show how integrated planning can reduce long‑term costs. Jan Stack described two alternatives: Alternative A would perform a wildfire‑mitigation undergrounding with a smaller conductor in year two and then replace conductor in year five, with capital costs of roughly $2.3 million and $2.5 million respectively (total about $4.7 million). Alternative B would install the larger conductor in year two as part of a single project, costing about $2.5 million.
Jan argued that Alternative B avoids a second round of permitting, two customer outages and tearing up a city street twice, and therefore is often the more cost‑effective choice over an asset’s life. He cautioned the presented numbers come from subject‑matter experts as conceptual, rough order‑of‑magnitude estimates and are not detailed engineering quotes.
During Q&A, Energy Division sought a breakdown and asked how costs were calculated; Jan said the figures were conceptual estimates prepared by cost experts rather than derived from complete designs. SDG&E also said overlap cases were uncommon in their review of recent reports but that integrated planning guidance is intended to provide a consistent starting point when overlaps occur.
Next steps: SDG&E will submit a tier 3 advice letter documenting its IGP decision‑making methodology on or before Dec. 15, 2025, and stakeholders were invited to submit questions by Dec. 2 for IOU consideration.
