Election Section

SAN FRANCISCO — Consumer advocates claim Pacific Gas and Electric Co.’s plan to emerge from bankruptcy could cost ratepayers an estimated $20 billion more than they would pay if the utility remains regulated by the state. 

The utility has asked U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to let it override dozens of state laws and regulations and transfer its power plants, transmission system and hydroelectric dams from state to federal oversight. The utility plans to borrow against those assets and pay its $13.2 billion debt. 

Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, charged Thursday that “this is not a plan to simply pay off creditors. This plan is first and foremost a plan to create windfall profits for shareholders at the expense of ratepayers.” 

PG&E sharply disputed the claims. California’s largest utility filed for federal bankruptcy protection nearly 10 months ago after falling into debt from soaring power costs it could not fully collect from ratepayers. 

San Francisco-based TURN says it reviewed and analyzed PG&E’s financial data and reorganization plan and concluded the average PG&E ratepayer would pay $1,100 extra over the next 12 years should PG&E’s plan move forward. 

At a news conference, Hoge said that conclusion was based on boosts in natural gas prices, forfeits of ratepayer refunds and a host of other factors. 

“This is the story of an agenda where PG&E has single-mindedly focused on making sure the most valuable assets go into the parent corporation,” Hoge said. “The most tragic thing about this reorganization plan is that it’s unnecessary.” 

California’s largest utility has said such a conclusion is wrong, since its reorganization plan calls for 12 years of fixed prices for the electricity it churns out at its hydroelectric dams and power plants. 

“From initial materials, it appears TURN lives in a parallel universe where you don’t have to pay taxes, money grows on trees, there’s no inflation and things never break or wear out,” Ron Low, a PG&E spokesman, said Thursday. 

Critics, including the state Public Utilities Commission and consumer groups, say the PG&E plan could lead to higher energy costs for Californians and lower environmental standards on the nearly 140,000 acres the utility owns throughout Northern California. 

“Most of the allegations made about PG&E echo the PUC’s concerns,” said Sheri Inouye, a PUC spokeswoman.