ML20147J098
| ML20147J098 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 03/20/1997 |
| From: | Gordes J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147J097 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9704100167 | |
| Download: ML20147J098 (4) | |
Text
,_
} :.3 x-
_ i.
,f 97 E50 Hill Road Winsted, CT 06098 i
March 20,1997
- Dr. Shirley Jackson Chairman' US Nuclear Regulatory Commission o-
^.
? One White Flint North 11555 Rocksille Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738
~
Dear Chairman Jackson:
in fbliowing the activities of the NRC over the past year it sounds as ifyou are attempting i to provide credibility to an organization which has had a long and troubled history in that
~
- respect. As a very small stockholder in Northeast Utilities, I support your action to bring l
f about improvements in that company's operations and increase the safety to those of us who
{
live in this state.
i i
I am concerned,~ however, with the conduct of that company which, while it is attempting to j
meet operating requirements, still harbors a deeply embedded corporate culture which.
places profits over honestly presenting information to our elected and regulatory officials.
The enclosed letter to the co-chairs of our state's Environment Committee describes an
[
incident which took place during testimony on utility restructuring wherein Northeast Utilities Vice President Barry Ilberman blatantly presented grossiy misleading information in an unprofessional manner as to create a false impression in the minds of the legislators.
Another utility's witness, equally opposed to the bill's renewable energy provisions, spoke in an objective manner which did not create the same form of false impression.
l t
I believe it is important to inform you of this incident which, while not nuclear in nature, reveals an unwillingness to root out the corporate mentality which has lead to the deterioration of nuclear conditions in the first place. As lone as this mindset persist. this company is not ready to resume nuclear operations.
e Thank you for your attention in this matter, f
Sin erely l
N.
Joel N. Gordes'
}
Former Vice-Chair
' Connecticut Legislature Energy & Public Utilities Committee (1987-1991)
Enc.
JNG/lds I
P 9704100167 970407 PDR ADOCK 05000245 U
'H
.PDR I
u.
~ _.
g m.-.
j
'97 Eno flill Road.
_d Winsted, CT 06098 March 20,1997 Senator Eileen Ms Daily, Co-Chair The lionorable Jessie G. Stratton, Co-Chair Environment Committee f
Qi Room 3200 LOB!
D Ifartford, CT 061%-1591.
1
Dear Senator Daily and Representative Stratton:
?
We truly appreciated the oppottunity to testify on RB 6957, AAC Environmental -
. Consequences of Electric Industry Restructuring. The bill represent's an important step forward in the debate on just how our electric _ system will operate and the economic and environmental aspects ofit.
r
' All of the other testimony was ofinterest to us. While we would not agree with many l
aspects of Mr. John Conroy's (United Illuminating) testimony, it was presented in a factual and straightforward manner. The same could not be said for Mr. Barry liberman, t
i VP ofCorporate and Environmental A0itirs, of Northeast Utilities and we wish to reiterate
)'
our objection to his tactics in writing so that it can be made an official part of the record.
In particular, we vehemently disagree with his_ misicading statements relating to
[
photovoltaic (PV) technology. The context of the bill calls for collaboratively-designed, cost-effective conservation and load management (C&LM) and renewable energy programs.
Mr Ilberman's reference to NU's own first-of-kind, grid-connected project which cost
[
$10,000 per kilowatt as indicative of what systems might cost is, at best, unprofessional and
[
misleading and, at the worst, a morally questionable and calculated attempt to undermine
[
the renewable provisions of this bill. Any properly designed collaborative program would employ purchase of systems in large enough quantit I
of driving cost down to at least $7,500 per kilowatt'y to realize economies of sca 3
1 -
In addition, NU's figure of $1.50 per kilowatt hour, based upon that proceeding cost, has been called by " ridiculous" and " absurd" by Dr. Shimon Awerbuch an economist who g
performs work for the US Department of Energy. Cost between $.18 to $.28 kilowatt-hour 2
L are already common in other utility programs and as more units are deployed these costs l
will drop substantially. The NU figure is a gross exaggeration of this by a factor of 5 to 6.
l i
. Much of the determination of the latter cost depends upon initial cost, the longevity of the L
' Discussions on 3/19/97 with: 1) DrL Shimon Awerbuch, economist and 2) Gerald Braun, a former utility executive with Pacific Gas & Electric and now with Solarex also felt the NU figure was " absurd" and quoted a price of $6,000 per kilowatt installed, a pdce they have offered for the past two years and havt_qunted10.EU.
- 3) Ed Kerns of Ascension Technology concurs with a $7,500 approximate figure but adds caveats depending j
i upon snow cover, mair.tenance factors and other conditions.
i
'.. Even at approximately $ 35/LWh to $ 55/kWh which includes financing charges, NU grossly exaggerates the
{
cost of PV by a factor of 2.7 to 4 tima The lower figure was supplied by Gerald Braun of Solarex.
I f
J
,, T.,3 ?.
s system as well as financing options available---exactly some of the market barriers which such collaboratively-designed programs can overcome.
For a company which has been under the microscope in terms of veracity fbr the past several years, Mr. liberman's performance was not a confidence-builder that their corporate culture has really changed. There is also the ren'aining question whether Mr. !!berman's position will reflect that of whomever is chosen as the new CEO of NU. Many fine utilities have already undertaken ambitious PV programs, compared to which, NU's can only be called token.
!!istorically, we will point out that this same company opposed similar expenditures for C&LM programs in 1987 before they were ordered to do so by the DPUC. By his own admission, Mr. liberman verified that the fruit of those programs were responsible for 500 MW of reduced capacity need last summer when they were crucial to prevent brownout / blackout conditions. We will need that saved capacity again this summer.
The future belongs to those w ho prepare for it best and we must prepare for the time when a largely natural gas-driven electric system will experience the same economic and reliability constraints we have faced in the past with oil and presently with nuclear. Now is the time to build resiliency into the system through diversifying the energy mix. Connecticut will get the economy it deserves commensurate with the efforts made to insure the reliability of its electric system. Conservation and load management and renewable energy provide a level ofinsurance ihr reliability of service and stability of price over time. Most of the states surrounding us have already made these determinations into a clear mandate and we do hope that Connecticut has the wisdom to fbliow suit Sincerely, i
pg
[ Joel N. Gardes b 'eg MacLeod 8 )
Jim Newberry g
cc: Shirley Jackson, Commissioner, NRC Senator Melodie Peters, Co-chair, E&T Comm.
Comm. Reginald Smith, Chainnan, DPUC lionorable Mary U. Eberle, Co-chair, E&T Comm.
Guy Mana Esq., OCC Alfred F. Boschulte, NU Board Cotton M. Cleveland. NU Hoard John F. Curley, Jr., NU Board E. Gail de Plananque, NU Hoard Bemard M. Fox, NU CEO Gaynor Kelley, NU Hoard Elizabeth T. Kennan, NU Hoard William J. Pape, II, NU Board Roben E. Patricelli, NU Board Nonnan C. Rasmussen, NU Board John F. Swope, NU Board John F. Turner, NU Board Barry llbennan, VP NU William Stillinger, Dir., NU Richard Grossi, CEO UI John Conroy, UI Tom Thompson, NESEA Ftr. Don Conroy, NACRE John Zakarian, Editor, Hanford Courant Susan Kinsman, Reponer, llartford Courant
.