ML20076E664
| ML20076E664 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1983 |
| From: | Harrison R, Tallman W PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076E650 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8308240599 | |
| Download: ML20076E664 (41) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:.- . ,
%g:p,,F)'
ap -
~*'
e
- l. s 4
%..g
~
a . .. , A
** .p
.- . k.> '
O.. {i'
.. V^f ,
'M' ses...
..r
' Shc h- #
. s
(' a .i c . '
<~ *,
a
+4 9
v , 5 ( , e '* .. l
&~ .
g
- 3
* .s ka Y
- v:. ,. , .I ,
o 'I. . ,. 3
'$k, y 7 '-
gy
~ --
Q* ',, j
}
t[4 -
.a ,
1 f% s
- =-
' ^ q. -
I'
- y
* . e %
7 f v ki _' . g_ A v.. f '
- 1 pt % .
, - 2 L' l(
- .. . ~-
-- -' ,EM -
s o Dw'
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ~ - . . . . . . .-----...--------==----.u---- -
, , . i .?
l , ,, n . , r. ,. ,
'y.r
On Our Cover
' A st4 o wn'ra.4; Now HampWwe, wthits . ._ .- - *
.,rfese gtw ps J ano ecorumb makeup, 'f; *
. 05ers PSNH a unque est d chaikinges and c c <
coportonmes to ponde sale, sehabie ard : -J ^ -
' economeelecincenergyonthercxx1toa ' . x 7-i
^
SCQEe eneQ/ uture, f wrald, at the same timec. . . - sabgsrdng the very tugh m,cd for < '" .
~ quaicy d I;te and erworment desired by the ' '
nearly one mi!!on people that make to the ' - Granie Stae : '; ,- - ' '
,. - L.w'- (. m. ....
m.
- ' . : .L .
.s- ^
.? MW ,. d.J.. 1,* ... _.nt b. rf> k.-
, , . , ,,,,w , , , . .,.
i + i Contents -i a e,x ' W;ns; r '
-,~ :. ; ,W ; x s,
-) -sj.
- m. ~ e.
l > a t-l : '. - 6 i s .= 1
- - a:
l
! =
l .. . e f. ~ *(
.f i
. . ' v, :
, ~. >.
., y. 4 -
1 3. .%. : w, . ;q - - 1 .,..,,n-i
, u,c .g
, , .j .
w .< 7 *l *5* e' $l -
'l
."g.
E
. . ~ ~ +r.maa'
, y
_m..<
. . , . . - , ~ , -
Arinual Meeting AR snareowners are urged to altend the Of Shareowners Annua' Meetng c be held on Ttusda/. May 12.1983. at 9.30 ant Fztern D@ght Saang l Time at the Sheratan-Tara Holet Bakroant Nashua. NH (Route 3 Emret! Tumpike l Exit 1 to Tara Boubard) Dunng te . l meefog there willbean opporturwy to l docuss m$ers d inerest pertmng to the Compp' 1 l l t Description Of Business Pubic Sennoe d New Hampshre c the targest i electnc ubhty n New Hamp; hire, supplyng I electncity to acorcnomaby three-Quarters d I the staWs popunton. The Comparticks inbutes and sells electnoty a: retd in approx
, rnately 200 cites and towns in the State d New Hampshire. The Cbmpany also soils elecincity
; at who sae o six em untieri. < :
l . , - 1
., .;o , .
I v..'.p(;f/L I 88 4.; *u'b l L 'r y 9 * .. "4
*g.
I
. g ?, . w , - 4
s,: 1.' , Corporate Offices ' sg b.I.L a.% ' d. % f M' L. *
.A.. ! eeJi, ..is ,j + t,,f.,..E
,,,.e 20ElmSirect.POJ80K330 m - J-u " Mar crosta.NewH.dh 0310f>; '. -
' Mytiore(603)869-000jc .
[. . . n w~. w a_ .
.asa N . m. . cl . n .'.LD is$a $'$$hYi ), , L * - ,. -Yin L .. i .
. ., ," ... .gg.g.4. s. s 9y
#. s: .
u. r . :W . . qfog 3 , . ~ y . p ' ,N
/
*t #
1982 . ANNUAL
. .: - l
'[ '
REPORT
/r ,
' [: a PUBLIC
' ~3 '
s . C.? SERVICE
=
s3+4e - =- OF l
' - 7
^\ r J2 NEW
. I HAMPSHIRE
'. 'd (,
/ q ,
is l
- 1 !
;. . ." , I l
'y
's y.. '
l I f,_ & .. r s i l l
;_gsg.
l l ( .
'. i
'Y g. .; f -
g ~g ) .,&.9 ,. .. t 4. t' . y . .+ - I 4 'O i'- .y . i Of& jN . y
.#?' y
.+
l L'f ,
~ '
'.f ',-_l . :
,. i- yc : ,. a.' f ,'
c i~
='_ m +. - ,
.4.
, . .- c, , .. . ..,
e .; :'1
.v , ,3
. f .k Y %i - ;. -?- 1 ],,.k
.g l:g;.p?,..,D:;l. :. ~
1 l -'{ M lpf * , .'r ! % : { r.'., ) .. .e ?" . , *e ' . - -
' ~
i
.h; h, . M. : wg- . a,l{:..![u -k.. '. . kv;.f.+... ~t. , , .
~
. . ._ t
.- +- - . b? .h.k.\r, ,
l
? a N- 5 '
- a 2
; . { . ._ . :~..g.,,- ; .
.;. _[- ' 'f* (d
, , l
[ ' 1 K." " '. it . ' . . -~ / )-M - - i i ' fr- . .,.: g. , .g..%', 4 .
.'$,ms, . e- , , . 7 .- ; w
*. . . ;kb Wo % W e N m enm n "'y2 .
?. . a- -
.. w . , , , . . - !
Richard Duvai,in bucket. i 1g 3 ' g:/<ar
- ile' : " e< 7
~.i-
- ,9,:g;, ;.: .?.il$l .
fstjfA:fi..-Q. Tgg,*'
- p. -t .y' p : and Lineworl<er Gil
-- . * :. . . . - r. . ~ ~ q,3 ,;
... . -7 Mailloux, working at a
,E . [4 >
1, ..,.~f. -z~w.. } ', f. ,, ~;. ] _e. Manchester. N H, location
- ;, * .=-. .
... .? P.. -
NY 4
.r are silhouetted by signs of new growth in New w; ~
g 1 :
.. . - ' i. ,;.g . . 4 5 . ,g.;g . . Hampshire. The state,
. y- g-l .g,.g
* ,' ;3,,- '
.. . noted for its scenery. l
-- 2- ; ..
m.a m,;g c. 3 quaint villages and coun. ' c,,> , .c. ;A . p T.q i -.;g..
'T f. .,/. > + - try roads,is also one of k . . . . _
~
' Ph44.
- 6 p,
-. : the most manuf acturing.
3 . ., '.i;[f. Tv . . intense states in the
.% .yff L *M -y ~ .i 3 .- . . . , . . A ~ 'h. ; '- -.i,-.j-_ , .: .4: nation and home to a
~-@e (f;:f,.. j f.. 73; .4, te -
.g . c. number of major manu- !
;. R .' I jf-fG:: % $:
l_ S; A fC . ' ,'l I ,fg' g
- m.
n....- . g: pf 3.
. wm. . _. s . . -
'4 %.: .e., .
. icid^
h.-..: f,g?. g. $;'. U-'.. . l + y . ,n
.. s;;v.,w, . .
(;., _ .:
?.'
Lettor to
Last year we rea'tJmed rnanagement
""" Throughout our hMory as a company, we W Ww aW e4h an 9 kom have txen commced to prosdng customers the Wu HamW Mc W am w at wud have delayed construction of wath a dependable supply of ektncity at a reasonable cost. whde prosd.ng a fa r return Seabd Stat,on Un.t 2. The Commc,cion sought to restnct the use of proceed, aom to investors in 1932, the Company overcame aWMap@ on W 2 wnecon signifcant chaheng% and achieved those but the Company successfuhy chaHengcd the goais vuth solut ons that have poter taHy order more the state Supreme Cour1 The dyname and far-reaching imphcahons for Court clearly upheid the Company s right to PSNH nake deosions reland to construction of the Last year's d.f'icutt and comp!cx proolcms Seabrook propct once a certitca'e of site and ngorously tested our management skd:s. but facil.ty had been received the knowiedge and conndence ga ned from Dunng the cource of the year, the Seabrook wr access wdi hefp us meet the cha"enges roject rea%3d P/ era! construction and regu!atory mdestones, includ ng iecept of a f In 1931, we reported to you that the Company favorable environmenta! imcact report from was redef ang its goats and strateg'es In the Nuc! ear Regulatory Commesion sta'f and l' November.1932, we unve@d our new future approsal by the Atomc Sa'ety and Lcensing plan. In a document ent.t:ed "New Energy Board of ssues and iriervenors for the upcom l Honzons " we expressed our hope to work ing operatng hconv3 heanngs. The Company together wth austomers tu rranane our er st- Is now conf +dently moving toward final bcens-ing and future suppoes of energ[ as well as ing and start-up of Seabrook Staton.
the demands for energ/ ln 1982 the Company acted decisively to Manag:ng electrca! demano is a new step mprove its overall communcahons prcy
', for the Company, but one whch wdl reap g'ams. Fol lowing a thorough communcadons sdstantaat Denefits for shar mcners and aud t by an outside consubnt. the Company
! l
- customers by reducing the need for new e' tabhshed and fMed the pos.tton of vice l president for pubhc a'fa:rs Next, the Com-l baseload generatng capaciy "New Energy Honzons" wdl have a dramatc ef'ect on how rany restructured :ts ensting commJncatons
) l programs and departments and surveyed j , PSNH wdl suoply electncity in the future, and on how customers will use that electncity. We customers and employees to determine i l i ; feel thG document G so imoortant that we the current a" tudes of tho;e two lmportant i haw devoted the entJe f ast section of !Ns stakeholwr groups As a result, the Company Annual Repor to it. G now in a txftter post:on to communca'e 2 more edectr/ely wtth our vanous pubhcs
; Constructron of the Seabrook Staton nucknr plant, which is vitd to New Engfand's future The Company has a! ways taken pode in the l electncity supply, cont.nued to play a major qu#ty and protesrsonahsm of its empbyees j In 1982. we took a number of steps to increase i role in the Company's activites in 1932. In
! November, an upda'e of the project's cost the quity and quant.ty of tra ning proryams i and Comp'ction date eshma'e indcated that and to increase employee invoyern nt in the
! Seabrook biaSon's two un;ts would be com- management prorms The Company has ar'd j pietod in December,1934 and March.1937 w"Il cont lnue to g:ve its fun support to sa'ety at a totar cost of $512 bdhon These estima*es trannq management skJI development refect an increa93 in cost of approximaMy and employee invouement programs such
$16 b@on, and a delay in complet;on of 10 a@2Mty CacMs We recognize trat only
! months for each unit. S:tomendy, the pro- through the skdl and dedQDon of each of pct's owners dmded to annia;n the 1982 our employem can we cont,nue to succeed level of cons +ruct;on on Un,t 2 in 1933. in our enmmament to provide an admua'e
'hereby chang ng tha' un!!'s comp!etion da'e and dy endM? supp!y of erog/
to Ju'y,1987. ShareyAners are aba an iroportant pan of the Me of the Company. and much of our in hqht of the neA eshma'e. rranagemert took two important stent we engvd an aMy in 82 aas undeteen to awu'e mat the Company would cont:nue to tv? a odtmndent conMant to review the sa'o, secure invmtment opportun:t/ f or cost and schdu!e est. mate and we j ins"uctod the propct's arch:tEct/ena neor to wr emnes
! urxMe the coat est;ma'e rnonthly Whde the Eam.nas per share of common stock for 1932 l increase in the est mated cost of Seabrook were $2 73. up $O 08 over the resut of the Stanon G substantial the propct rema ns an premous year The incame was onandy the econorncat investmen! compared to th^ resu!! of increavd Moaance f ar Funds Uvd estmateJ rost of over $3.000 per Hooft far Durno Construct <on (AFUDC) ottPt tr/ a 16 neo coat u nuc! ear omisrq planned or tyxent increase in tr e average nunst of currer2!/ undu' construct.on Abo. Seabrook sharm outstand.nq dur:nq the yuar Subon Mi sharpty reduce our d@enden on toregn Od. the Suppl / and Cost of wher, is unCUIta:n and 'Alll hpp rd jce the en-V.furlin+ff M Impact aH;cGD j Win iD%d
'ue !! Gen + %. n of ( tt% !/
l l
s'e'fies k)}buu)& M m ,7 % i i g 4
#.. 9
i Divide,nds Per Share 2 3 .
& Earnings Per Share l l vi <- m 2[ m mia I e I
- l 'e W '
EM&YELTO i i ,vs,__ - rel . ~ t-yuwen 1
+
%d 03
, i n .,er - -,
f f v, s. w.=, n-m .i m I i anw: x
b ' ) -
t '
.-I
. _ wam
.w -
.-- m l l l 5 D%
m t rs l i i I l l i l l. f
< :n 2 ,
i u I 19 9 ! +s1 1t1 HigMights of 1932 , 3 ~. g .. .. ; , ,
- y ;_g) .: :.:
; .: :-) g m.: 7,7 1,: g (m ,; E q er e . I 379 r :)1 J.: i$pe6:q
- 4 ,~,
t Er ; . h e ' ' . r, < / C m * ,- < ;. cL i P 73 i J cs 30 O > , o % r. , c : c r : s : .., o i. . m.:,7 07 pt a 3 ;2.: m3 l i l cn . . ..r.<- , u .+ ><- 11. . :ar c t 1 ns.ss t 7 a: .. I i i l C. , . . - : E .: . ~ e ,
+
i :..p).a v :
- c: vs mz s:. . .
hn...hu,Lscin ;FJ .c 1.17# . ct <) : m o r; 2p j i l' New Hampshire Sales l l *, .r. .
- F4 ,, n i1,,Tr y i: a., r>r -o+v./ 5. w r.,, 1.:
I ! I
, cf a r + ( ', , I .i r j ).
' O t i' A ; h ' ), . J 1 t; 1
' j l [ .g f9 I+ j' ( ,
9 I E, ,8 ;] f {1 I . i l
'l .
t i i I i l I t { i i I ( i l l
Generallnformation Transfer Agents The first Nat.onal By 4 of Boston Annual Report and StatisticM 100 ForJerN Street Supplement Bmton. MA 02110 The 1982 Annual Reprxt tvr; ten alTOT1 Manufar 'utes H.v e.* 4 int,t Con Uvy t;y tre Bryrri ot D. rectors ite 1982 Statttnal 4 Ne3yugp;,ca Su[ fifrW1 A (Cor ta'nir K1 cCT[Y> ate t tatGt CS New Yuk, NY 10015 for tr e tr,t 10 yo;rs) ud t:e avalut & :n earty . Apnl if you wotid i<ke a copy, or hase y Je; gistrars ta c at out it e Annual R"pritt or the Corn T ho Fnt N 3t ona! B.Y x ut Bmtc n p rrc prea'e v.tJe k) RuMI A Wn;ioA. 100 Feb 4al Swet S aet;cy. Pi,t R. Serwce of New Hamp, hire, [hton, VA 02110 PO Bx 330. M;etheA4. NH 03105 Moreyri Guauntv lor.t Comruny of New York Stock Exchange Listing ,0 W,est B'oadAw 3 SNyes of 15 nr va'ue comtrx;n stock aryl N :,s M rL. N( 10015
$25 pr Wue ryeferrewj stock are le, text on the N"A Yr;tk Stcok Ettur93 The Cur runy% Form 10.K
' yuLot on it e ut ung? c PNH Tte Con tnny v,H forn:Sh. Nuout dkrm.
. ' Common Stock Ownership k'; each stww 4 4 zho rru4'> a wrmen A; of Dewrnt*n 31 1982. tt ere were 66.552 W d ny4ey a copy of the Con t ur r/s OAner., of tho Compan/s comnxxi stak u hemt on onn 10 K m M M the scure and E ct eque Comoman. Shareowner Information WMien raiuer t.hou'd te tru 'aj to G, rule d c Sm <, of ' SMrcoA ner 'nq nr , , roTrd r q ct ung t of Branwn1 *>.91.Inmun3. P O. Bo* PL)3n. M<r one t,w. ad frem. desidendy stcx k trarr b 4 re- NA K 19 p,h 3 qan .n ent ,. loot or stuk n cer t Acau . o: of Mr NH 03105 at t:ount infunatan ',t ofd t e r1.ratoj to tre Tw r A
- Ag ot <r w:1 dur ter gj dct m.ing ag or as ton > As The i tst Nat ort 1! BY<k of byJori Stui. holder S f v w; Disuon PO.B9 644 Bmk2n. MA 02102 Dividend Reinvestment and Common 5 Stock Purchase Plan The Cornpiny hm a Dw<14 d Reinvestnent arx1 Con rnon Stock f urctn.e Plan tur its shtetyyA r er5 and employos I hrauch it e Plan, nh t en,rers cln purct a e st un(; of the Com,vr ty S common Stak without the
[Yling fit ' if any tKS Ora?? cornm6s!On Or 9 TVtco ch'iraf We tdese stretioAners wll frd tno Pan a conu niont way in wh:ch to
- ncrease the,r oAnersh.D in Pubhc S>ruce of New H,rrfLhire If you dwre rnore infor mat.on concern,nq the Plan. ple'r:e ante tu the a93 t for the PLv1 au folk;As Tho Fet Nabona: Bank of Bmton PSNH D mdend Arnvmtrrent and Comn.on Stut k Purctrr,e Rei e
PO Box 1681
, Bmtan. MA 02105 t
t
,2 i
To The Ye r 2000 As the yerr 2000 rpproaches, the pre- Compl: tion cf Se: brook St: tion is a school children cf today will be prepIr- mIjor pirt cf the Comp:ny's new atnergy ing to tika their placss es cdults in the supply plin. Oper: tion cf tha st tion's ! mainstream of life in 21st century New two,1,150 megawatt units,of which Hampshire. PSNH currently owns approximately 35 percent, will significantly reduce the Public Serv. ice o i be ready to prov,f New ide them Hampshire with efficient, w.ll need struction for the Companbto of any new soload consider con-gener-economical and secure supplies of ating units for a number of years to elecMc pergy. come. At the same time, Seabrook Sta-Providing a secure electric energy future tion will allow the Company to reduce l Is not an easily attainable goal. However, its dependence on foreign oil, the supply it can be accomplished by developing- and cost of which remain uncertain, and and implementing a plan, today, that will give the Company " breathing room" stresses the proper management of our in which to explore and develop alter-constantly changing electric energy native sources and methods of electric uses and resources over the coming energy generation. decades. In order to increase future flexibility in Recognizing the need for such a plan, matching supply with demand, and to PSNH invested months of research and further assist the Company in reducing study into the present and future supply oil use, the plan also calls for the pursuit , of and demand for electric energy in of other supply options, including the i New Hampshire. In late 1982, PSNH development of supplemental and announced the development of "New hydroelectric resources, as well as Energy Horizons," a long range planning the support of plans for purchased document that balances the most power from Canada. favorable benefits for two of the Com-pany's most important stakeholder The Demand Side of the Energy , groups-customers and shareowners. Equation !
"New Energy Horizons," however, is While the completion of Seabrook more than fust a long range plan; it is a Station and the development of other flexible, comprehensive bluepdnt that supplemental resources and hydro-points out significant new and inno. electric power is expected to play a vital vative directions fcr the Company in the role in ensuring the future of electric years to come.The plan focuses attention energy in New Hampshire, supply alter- -6 on both sides of the electric energy natives can not be expected to carry the equation by addressing the supply burden alone.
altematives for electric energy; stressing The assurance of a secure energy future, the potential in vigorous management of therefors, also rests on a complemen-the demand for electricity; and defining tary strategy that provides for the effec-the roles of both the Company and its tive management of the de:nand for customers in meeting New Hampshire's electricity. , energy future. PSNH's blueprint for the future recog-l The Supply Side of the Equation nizes these facts and seeks to provide a basis for the formation of a partnership la the past, most electric utilities, between the Company and its customers includmg PSNH, approached the electric energy supply problem with a solution in the management of the demand for that called for the construction of enough electricity. new power plants to continually meet To begin an action agenda for managing current and projected demands for elec- rowth in demand, the Company, follow- ' tricity. In the future, due to economic, E.ng extensive, computer aided analysis, legal and regulatory constraints, it will set a target goal for growth in electric l be increasingly difficult for utilities to energy demand of 1.5 percent per yett. , construct new plants. That goal, the Company believes, is low l By the year 2000, Seabrook Station will enough to ernuro the accomplishment be a mature, reliable energy producer. while PSNifs goal, today,is to cc lete both of stillthe companion providirs New supply Hampshire strategy,h wit Seabrook Station units a3 rap dly as opportunities for supporting population possible at an ownership leve that is growth, economic development and an financially manageable. overall improvement in the quality of life forits residents. i i
To The Year 2000 4 e b 9 i ;"[ -
$! e . , * !
.,g#".* n.
-, y' -
e e a 'e 4 l% + ' , , . .~L'* ,'L-4 w 1 :
, m,
..)
.- 9:
5 ',
,-{_y:_-
f-
.,#s,.
?)
Wh-.s ay
?+
f- n v..
- s. v e .3s.s a,.
-j e 4 i, j
/[ h h ..
yf, ,o
% _g, p , H :'f. , '
I .'
*I '
,ft h
* . .e , .- s;u s
,P',_3,- *
-9. {
L D t h i' s 7 I q ' ,[ A
. t ,
EE M
.,.k h f .
+
Y - f . u . lN;Qi n c
..i.
Ts The Ysir 2000 The 1.5 percent yerrly growth in energy The Company w:s tiso tctive in plin-domind la o goal, however,cnd not a ning the convIrsion cf a porti:n cf its forecmt. The Comprny's recent fore- oil fired gener; tion to coal, c:mplsting casts have been in excess of 1.5 percent the final stages toward the eventual con-and may continue to be higher. Nor is the version to coal of three oil fired units goal a stagnant one, because the Com- located at the Company's Schiller Sta-pany realizes that, as circumstances tion in Portsmouth, NH. change, its goals must also change. The difference between the goal and forecasts As the first stepin managing the represents a gap to be reduced by an effec. demand side of the energy equation, tive demand management partnership the Company developed a list of energy between the Company and its customers. demand management optionswhich are currently being considered by the The most crucial portion of the offort to Company, the New Hampshire Public manage the demand for electric energy Utilities Commission staff and other is in its application. PSNH's efforts to interested parties in a comprehensive achieve the goals of its plan will be investigation into the supply of and ! realized through positive action to assist demand for electric energyin New its customers with varied cost, quality Hampshire. and quantity options that will encourage efficient, wise use of electricity as well The options being considered by the as individual choice in the selection of Companyinclude:an accelerated electric energy use attematives. storage space and water heating pro-gram; a new and improved time of use in 1982, PSNH began to take the rates program; a water heating conserva-necessary steps to implement its plan tion program; a street lighting efficiency for the coming decades. improvement program; a CAP it, To provide the proper levels of future customer assisted insulating program; l energy su y, the Company began Programs geared toward direct Com- , increasing ydroelectric output, con. pany control of interruptible loads and ) Sources of Capacity direct Company control of customer verting from oil to coal and exploring (Percen0 l and supporting plans for purchasing apphances; an energy conservation I power from Canadian sources. Information program; and an enhanced l l m and expanded program of energy con-
! During 1982, the Company commission- servation audits.
I ed two new hydroelectric nerating The Company also instituted a customer
- units at its Garvins Falls droelectric am, called Station and began a 55.7 million project alert peak shavi,ng 8 Clockwatch 6,' in ovember. The pro-to double the existing generating capacity stpone h of its Eastman Falls Hydroelectisc gram
= Station. In July, the Company also use of asks sonw custaners electric a o i ,ances during applied to the Federal Enefty Regulatory heavy use periods when the Company Commission for a license to build a new determines that generation is headmg hydroelectric station at an existing dam toward an energy demand peak.
- Iocated in northem New Hampshire. Rapid completion of Seabrook Station, ny increases in the use of hydropower and Throughout supported a planthe which past year,the will eventua Compby coalinplaceof 01 innovativedemand m lead to the devel ent of a transmis- management progr.ims and research sion s stem bri Canadian power into h energy sources oHomonow are from ifydro Quebec to the New the first steps for the Company toward a England system. Currently, substantial secure energy future. Much has been
~ done, but much more still needs to be progress has been made in obtaining accomplished on the road ahead. How-state and federal approval of transmes-sion routes and substation locations for ever, through planning, perseverance the first part of the project. and innovation, a secum energy future
.o l- will be a realityin the year 2000.
Over the coming decades, PSNH will continue to seek out and develop I I economically acceptable hydroelectric generating projects and will crsntinue to support reasonable increases in the use of Canadian sources of hydropower. I I _ ll Ill
. Ih! II mu w 1
l E Od l n Coan E Nclear M Hydro and Other
hhr .; affy b" *2l;5h " d g . I
. 9 s '- h I
y l
- .' wp m,
,j c
<' 'g
) ?.. l ' Q - '
- l. ;g
; \
, +-
,b r %
ph '
- e a ,
l /, ,.
,j<
-. /' 4 eg
Ta The Yar 2000 Looking to the Future; distribution systIms; reseIrch and Research and Development dev1lopment cf new procAses cnd systtms in expInd tha use cf clun Research and development foi the gaseous, liquid and solid fuels; develop-power sources of tomorrow are being ment of systems and equipment to con-supported by PSNH today. serve energy through efficient manage-ment of electricity supply and end use; Since research into electrical energy and, developing improved information use and production is being conducted and forecasting methods to aid in on so many different fronts,it benefits energy decision making. i the Company to pool a substantial art of its research and development fu ds The Company was also involved as a with more than 600 other suppliers of co s nsorof a research ogram inves-electricity into one research and devel, tigat ng attematives to ch rination o ment fund.That fund is administered in marine biofouling control. b the Electric Power Research Institute Through its involvement in diverse, high ( PRI), which conducts research and technol y research, PSNH continues i development on behalf of its members. Its comm iment to the improvement of Through the pooling method, PSNH existing means and the exploration of can obtain the benefits of major alternative sources of electric generation research and develo ment ojects and conservation methods that will lead that are beyond the inanci i capabil- the way to secure, economically viable, ity of any single electric utility company. electric energy in the year 2000 and During 1982, PSNH contributed approx. beyond. Imately $1.5 million to research and development efforts.Of that total, approximately $873,000 was earmarked for EPRI programs. ! Of the $873,000,44 percent was used in research to improve existing fossil fired and nuclear power generation systems and to develop advanced generating equipment and technologies, including equipment for use with renewable energy sources. Remaining amounts 10 were allocated to research to improve current understandi of environmental and health effects of lectricity genera-tion and transmission; improving the l performance of transmission and I i
% %i g' % gc I W ;**\ 7' (
jl
. py M 0;p,[,j To The Year 2000 ff A,1;l:' s
. Au--- '
\ 1 p
,Y $
\' l
..,- 1 i p?. i . . ,
; y i
x s a? 72 Y-+ b3 5,yg- ? [f 3 I
-%m:$
, ' Si::
j
. 11 g" ll '
. Q
s 9 N
.5 %
s 1 'N ,3 3 k k A __
=- m a E
~
S s 3-J lj l
l 1982 In Review Operations The results of a prehminary report of the employee survey dd not surpnse PSNH A Commitment to Communications management 'lhat report indcated that in 1981, PSNH made an important comrnit. employees have a high regard for the Com-ment toAard refining the Company's abihtes pany and their jobs. As a result of this high to communicate with its publics, both inter. regard, employees take an unusual meas-nally and externa!!y. In 1982, major sindes ute of pnde in the'r work and leef that what were made toward attaining the goals that they do is important and contnbutes to the follow from that commitment. Company's goals. Dunng 1981, the Company began the proc. Employees also indcated that the Company ess of evaluating its communicahons cares about them and that its polcies are programs by retaining the nationally recog. essentally fair towards them nized public relations firm of Hill & KnoMton The final survey report is expected to be Inc.. to conduct a communications audt of completed in 1983. the Company. In June,1982, the Company announced the findngs and recommenda Management Development tions of the audt The Company continued, in 1982, to develop That audt found that the Company was grven and support programs to increase the effec-high marks for servce and rehabihty, but had liveness and effcency of every employee. suffered a dechne in pubic approval because In 1982, PSNH initeted a comprehensive of certain key issues and the Company s inabihty to communicate effective!y on them. managerr.cnt development program for o es Based on the findings, Hill & Knowlton the concepts of managing for productivity recommended, in part, trol the Company: and functional goals training. The program reorganize public a' fairs as a top manage is designed to improve skills in managtng ment function, rebuild the Company's mage p o ple. Sourcesof Revenue by atticulating specifc po:nts; f eve manage-The Managing for Productivity segment of the (percent) ment employees assume a more positive posture, see that top management s more program is aimed at developng a common accessible to the mede, produce more understand;ng of PSNH's management ! positive stones about the Company, and dynamcs. language and philosophy of ( establsh a greater communications staff management among Company managers. pesence at Seabrook Station. The Functional Goals Training segment is a part of the Company's ongoing effort to set Acting on the mcommendations of the audt, goals and objectives at the corporate level 12 the Company announced the creation of a and in each functiona! area of the Company
- vce presdency for pub!c at'a:rs, the restruc-tunng of the Pubic information Department to Currently, nearly 200 managers ha/e par-d3al more ef'ectrvely with the mede, and the tcipated in the program. It is expected that development of a communications master 600 wd have parIc. pated by 1984.
plan d3 signed to enable the Company to anticipate and address future communica- Employee Involvement
'" tons needs on a timely basis. In 1981 PSNH initeted a Quahty Circles program. The purpose of the program is to One of the first steps in developing an effec- create a bette" work environment through tive communcations program was determining increased employee participation and involve-the attitudes of those groups whch a'fect and ment in poject identifcation, analysis and are affected by a company such as PSNH- solutions to problems in those areas drectly E a'fecting their work.
u_ y _ To determine the attttudes of two key groups, l customers and emplojees, the Company in 1982, employees irwolved in Quakty Circles i undertook two survey projects in 1982. from vanous departments and dvisions c ti oughout PSNH completed projects and j The results of the customer survey in great made gesentations of ther f+xings to a measure conbrmed the behefs of manage ~ management. The projects selecied by the p, ment that the Company provdes depend l groups covered a broad range of C.mpany I , able servce and treats its customers activity from work schedules and joo perform-j farrly. Results indcated that 86 percent ance evaluations to delays in answenng
; of those polled sad the/ were sabshed wnh customer inquires.
1 PSNH. On the question of Seabrook Station, j results showed that 54 percent agrctd with reasons for the construction cf Seabrook
-H - -
Station. h i l w w M Resets M imbstnal W UbMaas M OWat
N
-e
#_ x g ~
- ' %I (j } ; '. - 'A 9
- 2- '
.h .. g ' ( ' o ))
1982 in Review k:s j,7,...y ,'" g]y*/ s A. - ,[ . y- - , : ;; ;.". . p . u ,,
~
y T, m.e %-
, - y
(-m
?:: __
~M p
~
f l'-
' sugl4t 13 jp 4
g_ dh 7a i, [A _ ?$
-(i Ud*;;
I
*E m
E f
1982 in R; view Ir every sense. Quahty Circles proseo a suc- Barbour is now responsible for the General cess in 1982 for both the Company and its Engineenng Division. the General Construc-employees and are expected to expand in the tion and Maintenarre Division and the Real coming year. Estate Department. Fra:n. formerly comptroller, is now vice Execuiive Caanges On January 20.1983, the Board of Directors of the Company elected Presdent Robert
$7 $%[ sons J. Harnson to the additional post of chief Parks now has overall responsibihty for a!l exewtNe othcei, effective March 1.1983. corporate management information systems func00ns.
Harnson succeeded Wilham C. Tallman, who had been serving as chief executive officer Also elected to rew positions were John J. since Janary.1969. Tallman continues as Lampron, assistant vice president in the area chairman, a position he has held since 1980. of finance George Branscombe treasurer. nd Robert G. Ouellette. comptroller. The election of Hamson as chief executwe offi-cer is a part of Compa~f planning for orderly Ef1ective communications, employee mc:ve-managerrent successiun which began with ment and finely tuned management skills-his election as presdent in 1980 and sub- together they will provde the catalyst that w:ll sequent election as chief operating officer assure the success of the Company's goals in 1981. and strateg:es leading to a secure energ/ Tr.e untimely death of Wilham A. Adams, Jr.. executNe ViCe p' Sdent and member of the Board of Directors. and the January.1983. Finance retirement of Vice President Elroy L. Littlefield. were major factors lead >ng to officer changes Finance In 1982 voted by the Board of Directors in December. The continued financing of expenditures Us:s of Revenue 1982. associated with the Company's construction program. including the Company's share of (percent) At the same time, the Company restructured Seabrook Station nuclear plant. played a w a portion of the executive staff to more evenly distribute executive respons6ihty and do " '""' "' an in 8 increase management effic ency and effectivenen Despite the poor market condations that Elected as senior vice presdents were John ed Mrst M d G82. N Company successfully completed five major 14 C. Duffett and Henry J. Ellis- finracings dunng the penod from Apnl
,o Duffett. a 28-year veteran of PSNH. is now through October, raising a total of $248.4 I-responsible for the Customer Accounts, milkon.
Operating and Goneral Services Divisions On ALnl 20. the Company concluded the f rst as well as Emp'o Relations Purchasing of its la82 offerings with the sate of three and Information ystems ad Services. milhon shares ci common stock. The pro-
' Elks ceeds of the sa'e. plus the proceeds under responsible a 36for year Company the areas veteran, is of Corporate nosvthe Company's Divdend Renvestment Plan.
Strategc Planning Rates and Load raised approximately $43 8 milkco. Research. Ene g/ Management and I The sale of $50 million in Sones E. General Research, Marketing and Supplementary Bonds was concluded in Energy Sources. and June Refundtnk48.1 to yield milkon in proceeds to
" Elected as vice presdents were Roy G. Company. and a $20 million Banken Acceo-Barbour. Wilkam T. Frain Jr., and Robert tance agreement was finakzed in August. i A. Parks.
llE
,y
- EE5 0 Cost of Fbwer :
G operating Erpmse I l D Operabnginccma 0 f.nes 0 Depreca'on
1982 in Review
~
- . . w.
' f, ,
w\ ' ' -
'g j i i3~5,. : . y ,;;yq 2
4
.r :.l4"d"4 N,;
- p
. h~E:;f;gj,
? . - r ,-$+i
- JN d . -_ . t si.$3dkm -
H??) : y.y 7 pip?_# s
~ " "2 ' -
rgg'eqQ,
~ ~hy. p"i };,a y_..;p A;
/)*
}
4=
% ' 6 15 efk. .
?h_ -
as w' f f s a1 ' '^ m_ w.x .
+ 4 e t
?) _. , ?._ _
Uk9L ,3 , 5,5 N,3,kf + g_y ! gy
. ~ ' '
N. ' e1[ .m [{N, [;'.g.f .
. , y;, ~,, *
,_ {?f: f'; . g
;A
.} $
"4 i
1982 In Review The Company took advantage of impraving Rate Matters market conditions in the latter half of 1982 by doubkng a planned offenng of 12 mdkon in January.1982 the New Hampshire Pubhc Utiktes Commis$on(NHPUC) granted a shares of preferred stock to 2.4 mdhon shares.
$28.9 mdkon. or 8 percent, permanent New which yielded $57.6 mdhon in proceeds to Hampshire retail rate increase.
the Company. Improved market cordons were also a factor in the sale of $75 mdhon in On July 2. the NHPUC approved an debentures in early October, which yielded increase in annual non-energ/ re/enues of j
$72.9 mdhon approximately $9.5 mdhon to recover cer- ,
Closing out the financial year's activity, the taMxpenmomM & Jamay I Company, on November 30. reneed the r to measa matunty of its $160 mdhon revolving cred.t On December 30.1982, the Company fded loan fur a penod of approxirrotely one with the NHPUC for an increase in its New year. Hampshire retad rates of $33 4 mdhon annually. o approximately 9.45 percent to Finance in 1983 become effective February 1,1983. In 1983. financing of construction expen- This rate increase request is necessary in d,tures, includ:ng Seabrook Station, wdl again order to meet nsing expenses due pnmarily be a major factor in the fin &ncGl activit:es of to increases in the cost of money, taxes and I the Company. Other expenses dunno 1982. Dunng 1983, the Company wil! seek to con- !n accordance with New Hampshire matutes. clude a numbor of ma;or financinos expected the NHPUC. on January, 17.1983. suspended to ra:se funds in excess of $450 mdhon. Along the effectiveness of the new rates for a penod Ccpitalization wth onanang of cont:nu:ng construction of up to six months. In late January and early and Short Term Debt assaciated with SLbrook Station, proceeds Febr iary, the Commission conducted a 1976 To 1982 wdl be used to rehnance certain matong number of pubhc informationa! heanngs , long term debt. meet required senking throughout the state regarding the reauested (millions of dollars) j fund paymena and finance working capital. rate increase. To date, however, no further The Corroany expects to ram the projected action has been taken on the Company's m request. Under New Hampshire law the 1983 fund.ng pnmanly through the issuance of corr non and preferred stock, debentures Company is entitled to place iM requested r tes in effect under bond in August.1983. and General and Refunding bonds and 5urobonds as well as through nuclear fue if the NHP,UC has not acted on the tnanongs pany s mud Wn. 10 The Company also expects to be involved in Earnings Rise , the sa!e of Pollution Cccnrol Revenue Bonds Despite Siuggish Economy
,, in conjunction with the financing of pollution Despie the generally sluggish state of the F control systems at Seabrook Stahon and con- economy an'd an increase in the average version to coal of three od fired generating number of shares outstanding. the
- units at ' e Company s Schdier Station. Comparr/s 1982 per share earnings rose Through March,1983. the Company suc. $0 08 to $2.73 from the 1981 level of $2.65.
R cessfuhy concluded the sa'e of five rndhon The increase in per share earnings in 1982 E i shares of common stock, yield.ng $91.5 was pomardy due to increased Allowance for mdhon in proceeds to the Company, and the Furds Used Dunng Construction (AFUDC) sa'e of $100 mahon in debentures, yield:ng The financing plan prorx1 sed by the Com-
= r, $97.2 milhon in proceeds to the Company- pany for the 1983-1984 penod is amoinous in The sa'es of the hve mdhon sha es of common scope and d: versified in mture but achie/able p stock and tne $100 mukon in debentures in hght of continung. timely and appropnate p -j f rep esent ine largest sa!es of both equ'ty and deht ever for the Company-ra' increases, a vastly improved capta! mar-y ket and slanly improung general economy.
nationa ly and particularl'/ n New Hampshire
' 3 Li B/ continuing the '.,uccess of our fir encial ph plans the Company can acaeve a successful a bN completion of beabrook Station, cont:nue to implement a plan for the future and ef'ectWy
@[
b meet the rm
- of customers. emplcyees and shareowrm wun a financialy heatthy com-pany in the years to come I'
i O 19'6 77 78 79 80 81 82 M Common M Pre'e"ed M short Term Debt M Other M G&R Bonds M First Mort Bone
.. . e.. ,.
.s ,-. . . ,,
;f .-
.f- .
Q; . .. fQ Q * [ Q Q y g }k.0;Jh ' M,'[ g(2.Q h' -
- h. Q)Q
-hg I '.':6Dd
~ -
g4 ,
. #.tgadr .a ' 7 ^ .v .' v - t -
h ;';.mii ;W
.. m. ..
3 .,
. .. 4 *
.r . .: .f h .
A g.;
. : < - 4. e - --
, . , , 3[ _ .,y, s .; , . . -.., ,, ._,
- : w
.'...T p
,.- 7t*"T ,
- M ..: f u .,_ % . . Q . + - .:p'
-.topsn g.w (. , , .
.- 7 -
JEE*~ ,,,' N *:v.%" ', J . -n Q?.4
,......e ,- -
\ . &f '- 3 ;.N. . :-: .
- c i b; 't'R . .. ' ?.
- l. <'"
* ..i .9: . - '. C . - a . .
- 5. i-L ; . - :. l '
'" .: . .y.%. . T,A"* # . .
y ~y EA w
%,.a. M.,'
.m#
-x -
esamme . . f&
- a . ; ?. -.. '
- l. -
m w =.-- es '.
-- [ ? y, . - . - [ ' ? L. Y .
" .$l:.~s'lg:Q'. R 3% _ ;[ .,
,~
.'f f[ ,, a f . 4: ;h a?g w n g' *[ , _ %,; ' s'.[ [ .i[ ;
V .. ; .- * ;.f u-,% T .. . .. .w, . ;
* "~ : #^-
~ ^
l ,s Y' RT ' . , . , . so , . '. ,.4 7. . .w .
> gr .
34,w 4 y sen. .s < *.,+ e . ,kyky/~ M ,. :.
. ..i.',.>.,-
Q'.,;;;b((h.._
; ; 4. t~
., }T y g 'f. . N;).h. ..J42,'[llp%[G,.q N &
_Qq , . , . ar . .- .
- g. .~j -~ ~gl y . .
w
- ;$. ; 4 .g g w
(
' } pR ,, : _ f .. . , y. 7 m
"' e 3 .
y%. y .. ;: _
, j f
l 1
~
'- - :i. g j l -
es s
.. ,. ,4. ,
j ' ..
. ' . ..,f y '- 9;Q : 17
'_..".c?.-c, ,
.., y .. . . . , - ,, z . . .f
. , y i f. . , - 1
,; ,- . .' J
.: ' Q,5 l . . - .
h w .- ' ,,f..' W uW mi e ned ' w lero :.,.Y v .:
~
T.a. *
*: . ., Y. t. q:@
.p
.*;6_ .
w.. . <~ t , .,' y<% l . ?' inQ,* . . ' .; ).k . ;.) . - y .
-; .If.. r...'....a,' ..
%y
. s v , _: -y M .'%y
- \.4 _ d'c s 1 r- .
. ,x u ,
* +
I-k ;
.r.
I _
- 3. ; Q..;; ._ ,
p,ges.
.p. h. . --
.g ., , .
, .. <: .. .c , . -
&k L. ' f_,'.,5.'?
_; 'l- h- . ..,. X,
~
s *a h T' k :',kk , l'd.. . - ['^* 4 . . = 9
'u .} .
3 . E.jl - ,.h,*.:-
- '.- J.,N ' ' . ; ' / : [ .' ' , . %.
y : '
,. . l'y.-
.s . ; ' - ll;*
. ' ' -s
. r, . m; . , ; . .>s. , .7. .. .3_.....,... .
?--
. . , s.,. ~ .a .:.<. . ... .>
. e .- . . ~ <u., .g.
. ~::s s..
. . .p. ,
- -. . . - :. ; g;e . r a -
4 ,.
..b
; g. . . . ' , . . _ ;_ . ,. >
4 .-
.;,w.
- , . -,'. ..;~.~_,_.. .: - ?.s .;' . - , , ;.-. 9 .. .
n _y y.g. y;;v .: . st
. ] .- . .._ .
- ' f* , . ' .E . ., T.
' ; , . .. A f1 .- ,.1',.. . ,, i
. . . , _~ . ,
. ; i)$ . i 7-' '.)X,' ' 7 .:.v'.. ~ f;y, p.' y . ' . .. ; ' ~ .
.- ~. : - ~v . . , . . T .f*
4
- ,;,_ O -
.. r .
? >%. ~.
o i. . ; . ~ r *s - '. . . . .s c . - Q . . ' %. '; - .~ ,
%,p;.5,. _ y . :,. . , .9 +-
=
.p w..h 2 :- h.- .^ ,f;".Q l .. . .;. .' ' , . ... ' i. %, 1*-y
. kN
',ld. .' . .dw -3 . .
- q. . . . ' " . .
,f^ ..
. . pY>. .y \.;p: n . e . . .
; u. k. . G ;. .
)'" '
'# 'f
J.- O :. . *2 . :.s,' h h .4; . '" - D; ., -d..~ . l d. F; '?.hGJL; . .l ' l .'.
.,. o
'J.v e
, ,.w. $f.a ..d%. .
- w? v ? ~a*g}@fe ;.:&.:,m:y
.": k c-., :a; f .n' T g. : r . q ' M
. . .my c
;. . .: q .l.. . g.9 ..
y q Q.y. . M e c... p. :.' ?: .. : ~7 9 . -% q@3 v ' T, . MV %g_ %gm,.%f y y.ri' %;_;._ j' p. ^
. b.n. .! ' :. r '. .n .. .'
'S. [.I: l' hf .{j,.t p{ c- jgfklL j : $
1982 In R: view Production in September. the completion of the first phase of the assessment was reported The Seabrook Station Milestones report stated that. "Seabrook Station does not stand out. in terms of nsk, from otter s:milar A number of major construction mdestones were acheved at Seabrook Staton oter the nuclear power plants that have been ara-prewous year lyzed/ and that. " Features smcibc to Sea-brook Station do not introduce elements of nsk One of the major portions of construction, that set Seabrook Station apart from the spec-unique to Seabrook Station. is a set of coohng trum of rcks observed at other nuclear tunnels which will channel seahater to the sta plants.' t.on's condenser cookng system. The tunnels. each approximately 1.5 miles long and '9 feet The second stage of the assessment, dunng in f:nshed diameter, are currently teing kned which the first phase results will be refined. with concrete and are expected to be flooded is scheduled to be completed in the spnng of 1983. witn a tiro! report due in the late fall in 1983 of 1983. Construction on the reactor containment budding for Unit 1 progresed rap d!y and The Protnbikstic Safety Assessment. undes i was " topped off" on October 7. Work con. taken by the Corrf>any. is an extremely tinues within the Unit 1 containment budd:nq' ngorous approach to eva!uating complex i on the reactor and auxihary spiems. tochntcal construction and s a tool that facihtates an analysis of the probabihty of
, Work on the reactor containment building for sequences of accidents, the probabihty l Untt 2 a!so continued throughout 1982. By of mu!t;ple fadures resulting in catastrophic year's end construction on the intenor and accidents and the impact of such events.
l I outer wails and placement of equ!pmer,t
! Projected within the conta:nment tolding were in progress Regulatory Milestones Capitalization in May, the Nuclear Regulatory Commisson end Short Temi Debt The completion of the administration budd,n9 (NRC) began the process that will eventua!ly l 1983 To 1990 as well as the placement of the structural steel lead to an operat;ng hcense decsion for (millions of dollars) framework for the Unit 2 turbine-aonerator Seabrook Staton '
j budd:ng occurred during' the past year. In September, following several peheanng . l On January 31.1983, approximately 71 per-3000 sess ons, the Atomic Sa'ety and L. censing ) cent of the est rruted costs of Unit 1 and the Board of the NRC admitted seven of 12 1 common faciht;es for the station had been groups that had asked for intervenor status in expended ApproxmTely 27 percent of the licensing heannas. The Board also hmited
]
i 18 the est: mated costs of Unit 2 had been the ssues that can be rased in those hear l expended. with the entire project being ap' ings to questions that concern the monitonng l noo proximately 52 percent complete. in terms of of radinachve emssions, control room design. l dollars emendod. not includ,ng AFUFC :nd andquahhcationsof employeesand i i nuclear fuel training'ency emerg and evacuation procedures. j I 1 In terrrs of man hours earned. Seabrook Station was 53 percent complete as of January 31.1983. with Unit 1 and common Heanngs are currently scheduled for m d.1983 in December,1982, the NRC sta't released its ) l l.l facil. ties being 70 percent complete and Unit Final Enwonmenta: Impact Statement. That 2.18 percent complete The difference be- statement pointed out that after weighing the tween cost and man hours earned reflects environmental, economic, technical and other the purchase of matena!s which have yet to benef;ts aga:nst environmental and economic be insta!!ed costs. and atter considonry available a'ter. rutives at the hcensing stage. the action call-I e Another mdestone on the road to eventual ed for was the issuance of operating hcenses I ooerabon of Seabrook Staban was also reahzed iri 1982. for both Seabrook units In Apn!, the Company initemd a Probabastic l Safet/ Assessment, conducted by the con su!iiry finn of Pickard. Lone and Garnck. 500 I 4 l t#3 54 as an er as 89 90 , f J RPref Stoca i Nsommon Eqwty M Short Term Debt j E Long Term Dett
4 1982 in Review 9 4;
=
E 2
? T \~
M
.' k-=
~
w'% ' +.
~
\ m Q:
f h MM
- =&
1 g ;
- '% _3
._ .. 4
-r = 2: -
_)
' T. -Q-y i
(w . n .- _ g.; ; (.N 2 P1 -
;'J .
]
.: 1 Q. 19 a Nf r :%q. . ~
k ; l
,, 5
" lh , _
f d S
. 9 _
.y =$ b.-
'i. _
y . 2 g?&, s 4
= = . 8 v , l Sm =-. -
2 ~- [y l ss
.Y -
=
f
'l^
3 M
\
Ii a
^A 4 .-
'~
- r,. .
q ,, a
.(. . .
l [. .
1 1982 In Review The statement a so said that Seabrook Station The new estimate represented a $1.56 billion would improse PSNH's and New England's increa<e in the cost of the project and an abikty to orovide rehable electric service and extenc on of 10 months to the completion trol the overall socioeconomic effect of the dates *or both units from the previous estimate plant would be benefical. announced in Apol.1981. The Final Environmental Statement will be a The increase in the cost estimate is attnbuted key document when the NRC Board opens to a number of factors. Included are: costs I licensing heanngs this coming year. due to increases in quakty assurance, added ! costs due to deferral of some work originally Seabrook Station's New Completion scneduled to be performed on the units in Cost and Schedule Estimate 1980 and 1981: costs is)ceted with in November, the Company announced that. increased quantites of matenals and labor; following an extensive.15.000 man-hour additionaf financing costs; cost increases due review, a new completion cost and schedule to added design and engineenng complexF tres; and other miscellaneous costs. estimate for Seabrook Station had been "W Increases in design and engineenng com- ) According to the estimate reporI, Seabrook plexites were caused primanly by changes Station would be completed at a total cost of made necessary by new regulations,
$5.12 bilhon, with Unit 1 being completed in upgraded interpretations and potental inter.
December,1984, and Unit 2 in March.1987. pretations of regulations projected by the project architect /engtneer and construction manager, United Engineers and Constructors. Fcrecast of Seabrook Y:arly Construction Expenditures PSNH Share Seabrook Station Completion Cost and Schedule Estimate (millions of dollars) Increases from the estimate of Apol.1981
- Matereis and labor $122 m@on increased design and engineenng complexities $459 mdhon Incre sed quagty assurance requirements $ 53 mdhon 20 _
Addad costs due to deferral of some work on the units in 1980 and 1981 _
$324 milhon Other $111 milhon
*- Add $onal financing costs (AFUDC) $490 mdlion TotalIncreases $1.56 billion
,so- i Esttmate of Apol.1981 TOTAL OF NOVEMBER.1982 ESTIMATE
$3.56 billion
$5.12 billion Add.tional costs associataj with est mated four month delay of Unit 2 $120 milhon Current Project Cost Total $3.24 billion 12 0 -
80 - ll o-l % i $ 1 I 0 - r 3M eb n er .vi M x EE Nuc! car Core (Rem E Nuclea. Core thi Core) E Urut 2 E Urht 1
1982 in Review
.nL, .
.f Y
- 4 f #7 0 i.
V9 '.*, j;; ,
, , s
'/
~?
..y-. 3 y ,
. .- , , ~ .
=oo- 4
- es ,
4\j-h
~
D - +
=.. . - . . ~ , = =
.__w- ._. s e-was gg -s w
~
,jfhi. f?q'Y. .~^
w y - mW.l.
.. o r ..i
** t E
e
=
~
'N .. ,4
_p t 4~ ,
~
a **d _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _
1982 In Review Immed ate:j follow:ng the announcement of The Company has aGo appi:ed to the Federa! the estmate, the Company inttated act.on by Energy Regulatory Commmon for a hcense to arrang:nq to have the estimate rev!eved bu:!d a r(w hydroelectnC stalon at an existing by an independent, nanonaby-recognized dam located on the Androscogg n Ruer in organizahon, and by instructing the pro!Oct northern NeA Hamtr.h:re. engineer to develop an ongo:ng estimate wah monthly updams so that the Company cou!d Dunng 1982 the Comoany cont.nued to be eaupped contini rfly wdh the most up-to- vigorously support the pavate development date informat:on on the project's estimated of supplemental hydropower throngn power completion cost and schedu!e. urchase ageements wth pnvate hydro station dovelopers After thorough analyss of the neN est:rrate by tne Company dunng which a number o' The Company was also active dunng the past opt;ons, including ma:nta,ning current sched year in the conversion of a portion of 'is oh u'es and various delay alternaDves for Unit 2 ;med gensaton to coal were considered management recommendod. Dunnq 1982. the fnal steps 10%ard the even and the Seabrook joint owners apprc.ed for tual cawersion cf thrw of four o? tired units 1983, a construction program for Un t 2 cathng were in;tiated The units to be converted are for a reduced level of consuoct'on in 1983 located at the Company's 180 meaawatt The acproved 1983 construction scheduie tc, Schmer Station in Portsmouth. NH The $441 Unit 2 represents a chance from that ca!!ed m on conwroon prow is man to haw for in the November,1982, estmye. In order one unit operabonal in August, the secord in October. and the th rd in Decerr ber,1984 to meet the unit's schedu'ed compiet;on date of March 1987, as outlined in tnat est, mate. Through progress in the completion of the work level cn Unit 2 would have to %abrook Staton, the add. tion of econome accelerate en 1983 However. cund. bons ca:iy viable hydropcAer ard the conversion dictated that a lower work level, simdar to the of offJed generanon to coal, the Company level of actmty in 1982 tm ma:nta,ned At contrue1 in 1982, to reabgn its generatog this lower level, four months wcl probably be mix away from undependable and egenove added to the completion date of Unit 2. How- foreign od generaton and tavard more ever, work on Ur't 1 continues on the sched ecoriomical and stable sources of generabon u!e ca9ed for in the new estmate. wch a inat wi!! charactenze the supply of energ/ into completion date of Decerrber,1984- the next century Activity in Hydropower Development and Oil to Coal Conversion Accelerates 22 In 1982, the Company commissioned t Ao new hydroelecinc generat.ng units at its Gar-vins Fahs H/droelectrc Stabon. The two new un ts were the f.rst to tm insta!!ed try the Com-pany since 1948 The new units are now sup-ply nq enough electncity to moet the needs of 2.600 households The Company also tagan a $5 7 milhon prol-ect to douole the exsting generatng capaaty of its Eastman Faus Hydroelectnc Stat on, located in West FrankLn. NH The project
- nvolvrs replacing one of the statorfs twc exct;ng generatng un;ts y ch a new and !arger one and the overhaul of a secord un:t When completed in the fa4 of 1983 the Eastman Fa4s Staton wdi save appromrratety 22.000 barrets of od yearly
\
i
v. 1982 In Ret 4iew
- w. . .
. .p :. _ - p Y' '
.t , ~l r* f's ,s',
_+ 4"i ' .s 1 ' ~
. y., i;(:~ r ;
yW s l-Q^ ~
- A M% .i
#, .-wpf. Ts _q m .,
5 i ... e
,1 - 23
, ',I s_.
4 k $~1 t t 1,,- - [', 5
- ' t ,
' .is'Q
' blr 7
. ,p:-: ,. w Y #f-A.' s ....i ,j
{.
-+ a . :- .> % .;
k
..e 5 f .h.y 4 ',
y: 4
) ',P
/ +y *% p-
_.,_, p ' ~w,.i~':..;:i -- 6 S 7 i.D^t [s //-["i ,]M.,e 8;y ti._' * *, < OXjk. 2L-~ w ~ S 3.?:A'h s .. ~ e o, [f[Jpr x l,ggg6
<.2.
- l: ,, x -~?
uhQ, y .:l ,p;" < : 3
=,..
A.,.'
'44...**
y' '% ,s
Statement of Management Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants l The tnanoa! statements and related finance! data contained The Board of Directors in thr; Annual Report have ten orepared by rrenagr5per,t Pubhc Service Cormany of New Hampshire' < I based upon currently avalable facts and orcumstances and maragement's best estrnates and gudgments of known con. V.'e have examined the balance sheets and statements of etons These statements have teen prepared in conform;ty capitahzation of Pubhc Serv ce Company of New Hampshire wch gereraity accepted accounting pnnopies as aoplicaole as of December 31.1982 and 1981 and the related statements d earnings, changes in fironcial position and changes in i to a reju'ated elecinc ut;hty. common stock equity for each of *he years in tre three year i The Company mantains a system of internal accounting con penod erded December 31,1982. Our e aminations Aere trol which provdes management with reasonable assurance made in accordance with geneta!!y accepted aud ting stan. that tr e Company's asxts are sa'eguarded and that transac- dards, and according!y included such tests of the accounting tions are e.<ecuted and recorded in accordance with manage- records and such other aucting procedures as we consd-rnent authonzation. The concept of reasonable assurance ered necessary in the circumstances, recxx;nn'es that the cost of a system of intemal accounting in our coinion, the aforemeritioned financial statements pre-control should not, in the judgment of management, excwd sent fairly the financial position of Pubhc Service Company j the benetts derr<ed. This system of internal accounting control of Ne.v Hampsh,re at December 31,1982 and 1981 and the i is monitored by a staff of internal audiors and supporled by results of its operations and the changes !n its financel posF v.ntien pohoes and procedures admin stered by quahfed and Ion for each of the years in the three-year period ended suitably tra:ned personnel. December 31.1982, in confntmity with genera 0y accepted
- The Board of Directors, through its Audt Committee comprised accounting poncip!es appled on a conststent basis.
soie!y of nor remployee d: rectors, meets regularly w1th management. the internal audt sta'f and the Company's irde-pendent certdied pubhc accountants to review their actutes and remonsibites. Both the interna! aud.t sta'f and the inde-pendent certified pubhc accountants have free access to tre k,/ ,- k 4h ,1 j Aud t Committee, without management present, to present J the resuits of their aud! work. Bccion Massachusetts The indeoendent certifed pubhc accountants. Peat Marwick. February 15.1983 Mitchell & Co . are engaged to examine the Company's finanoa! staterrents in accordance with generally accepted audting standards 24 =
.h R J. Hamson Prescerit and i Ch:et Executw Omcer r((
C1. Bayless Financel Vice President
I, 4 i e 25 t t I f i i i
=~= ,,_. _ -.
****h-------- . __,, _ ,,
l Management's Discussion Throughout the penod of constructton of the Seabrook Phnt, and Anslysis the Company must continue its permanent and long-term of FinancialCondition finanang prcqram in order to rercy short term tnnk borrow and Results of Operations en incurred largely to tmnce such corsituction. Adegnie and timely rate increases. conhnued avadabaty of short. term Construction Program bank crest ard external financing a'e essental to enable and Financing Requirements the Company to continue its construction program ard its busness opsatons I he Company is engaged in a targe construction program. the major component of which is its 35 56942% share of the i he Comoany's earnings wi!!, until completion of Unit 1 of the r 2300 megawatt Seabrook Nuciear Power P! ant located at Seabrook Plant and its inclusion in rate base, consist primarify M Seabrook New Hampshire (the "Seabrook Plant"t Un.t ' is of AFUDC. AFUDC is the current cost of funds investec in a E-estimated to commence commer^ial operation in December, construction project expected to be recovered from customers -- 1984. and Unit 2 in July.1987. (See Note 8 of Notes to Finan- over the service life of the project through revenues, when the cial Statements). project is completed and included in rate base. Since AFUDC g in November,1982, a review of the Seabrook Plant construc. does not represent cash earnings. cash for the payment of _
=
t.on schedule and cost estimate was completed. As a result interest and dividends wi;i need to be provded in large part by external financing until Unit 1 is included in rate base. n of this redeu. the total cost of the plant upon completion was increased to $5.120.000.000, an increase of 43% over th" in 1982. the Company raised approximately $248.400.000: pre /ious estimate completed in April,1981. In view of this in- $49.800.000 by the sale of Common Stock through a public crease, the Company and the other participants in the Plant M offering in April and through oppraton of the Company's Dive have agreed that the construction level on Unit 2 wi!! be reduc- dend Reinvestment and Cc.TT.cn Stock Purchase Plan.
- E ed dunng 1983, below the level assumed in the, November $48,100,000 by the sale in June of General and Refunding -
estirnate. This reduced level of construction will increase the Mortgage Bonds $20.000.000 under a Bankers' Acceptance total estimated cost of the Seabrook Plant to $5.242.000,000- fac*ty financing for the Company's inventones of fossil fuels g The Seabrook part:cipants have retained irdependent con- under which no amounts are currently outstanding pending - struction consultants to review the November estimate, and regulatory approval of the reneguteten of the collateral prove, g their init:al presentation to the Seabrook participants regarding sions thereof. $57.600.000 by the caie in September of Pre- g-the estimated costs indicated that the process by which the ferred Stock and about $72.900.000 by the sa!e in October of g Debentures. In December,1982. the Company entered into e cost estimate was derived was sound and that the estimate appeared reasonable based on the estimated comotetion an agreement with a major contractor for the Seabrook Plant ; dates, but that the Company's contingency was at the low end (subject to receipt of mcessary rcquiatory and other approvals) g providing for loans to the Company of $1.500.000 per month ;- of the industry range. An additional report on the consultant's review of the estimated completion dates is expected to be in 1983 and $1,000.000 per month in 1984, repc./able in 1985. s-made by late April,1983. Hearings being held by the NHPUC with respect to this loan are not completed and the Company is unable to predict E The estimated cost of the Plant is now reviewed on a monthly whether the NHPUC will approve the agreement. = 26 basis by tne architect / engineer, and no changein the total T estimated cost as a result of this review has been necessary The success of the external financing program has continued through the early part of 1983, during which time the Com- E throug' h February.1983. pany has raised approximately $188.675.000 through the sale The Company's constructen program has been the major of 5,000.000 shares of Common Stock in January and the { reason for the increale in Unfinished Construction and sale of $100.000.000 of Debentures in February. During the =- Capitahzation. This increase is expected to continue until the remainder of 1983 the Company plans to raise an add;tional - units are in commercial operation. amount of approximately $300.000.000 and during 1984 ap-proximately $375.000,000 through the issuance of Preferred i The Corrcan'/s current estimated construction expenditures. and Common Stocks. nuclear fuel financings, bonds, deben-exclusive of Allowance for Funds Used During Constructon tures, polluton control revenue bonds and other financings. = (AFUDC) for 1983 through 1987 (approximately 70% of which are for the Seabrook Plant and the remainder for other proj- Under New Hampshire law. Unit 1 of the Seabrook Plant may ects), are as follows: not be included in rate base until completion of its construc-tion and commencement of commercial operation, currently 1983' ' $ 331.300.000 estirrated for December,1984. At that time, the Company 1984' 265'400.000 expects that substantel retail rate increases will be requested. 1985 192'500.000 The Company's cash flon fui ii e 1985-1987 pened should be 1986' 160'300.000 substantally improved and its permanent financing require-1987' 73.900.000 ments for the period reduced be!ow those for the 1983-1984 Totai. $1.023.400.000 period. depending upon when and to what extent the cost of Seabrook Un:t 1 is included in rate base. Conversely. a Actual constructon expend:tures have substant ai!y exceeded matenal delay beyond December.1984 in either the Com-mercal operation of Unit 1 or rate base treatment of the costs past est; mates and could exceed present estimates because of the unit would substante!!y increase the Company s financ- , of changes in the Company's plans. cost increases. delays ing reqwnents for the 1985-1987 penod. = resulting from regulatory and hcensing proceed ngs, expiration and renegetation of labor contracts, and other factors. It is also puss,ble that addt:onal experxitures may be required to meet reaulatory and environmental requeements at the Seabrook Plant and at the Company's other generahng _ tac:hties ,
* " ' .----a ---
Results of Operations Net income increased in each of the three years since 1980. esenues drdned 4 % for 1982 a'ter increasing 26% in however, there was not a correspond ng increase in earrmgs 1981 and 20% in 1980 As megawatt hour Saim dconed per share Add;t:onal stock issues hase increased preferred orW sif;ht! /dunng the three years. the change in revenues dv+dend requirements and the average number of common tosiM ma:nly from rate changes whch are d scussed in shares outstand:ng. result;ng in a decrease in earn:ngs per Note 2 of Notes to Firancial Statements In 1982, energy cost share in 1981 and hold og down the level of increase in 1982 recovery revenues dtdned more than non energ/ revenues and 1980. increaTd in 1981 and 1980 both energ/ cost recovery and inflaton continued to affect Company operations, since under non.erergy revenues had increased. Current regulatory practir.e the investment in utAty plant is Fud and purchased power expense, on which energy cost recovered at historca! cost but repbceci as necessary, at rmovery revenues are based. also has a sign.fcant effect on current cost. See Note 10 of Notes to Financial Statements. orcrating expenses. This expense was 59%. 65% and 62% which reflects the approximate effects of inflation on Company of total operahng expenses for 1982,1981 and 1980. respec operations. The data presided in Note 10 hase been prepared tively. and presented in conformity w:th guidehnes estabkshed by the s Financial Accounting Standards Board and should be viewed
) The fo: lowing table provides an indcaton of the effect of as experimental and only approximations of certa'n effects of crnncps in the ma;or components of this cost. infbtion on operations of the Company.
Increase (Decrease) The results of operations dscussed above are not necessanty From Poor Year indcatrse of future earnings. It is expected that higher opera-1982 1981 1980 ting costs and carrying charges on increased investment in Fuel and Purcha9M plant. if not offset by a simdar increase in operating revenues Power Expense (produced either by penodic rate relief or increases in kdowatt-(12%) 36 % 27 % hour sa'es). will adversely a+fect future earnings. Growth in Average Cost of Oil KWH sales will be dependent on the rate of economic
) #% groath in New Hampsh:re. weather and the use of alternate A r t of Coal l Per ion 10 % 8% 5% enew soum '
Omrat:nn enxenses other than energy costs have increased k 17%.19% and 16% for 1982.1981 and 1980. respect lvely. etat.nq for the most part the contanued out dechning impact cf in haSon on wagm matena!s and taxes Tota! f@rai and sta'e taxes on income increased only slightly in 1982, retimt.ng little change in the comporents of taxable incorne Tases in 1981 decreased sign,fcantly from 1980 due to a change in the method of accounting for AFUDC adooted in 1981 27 Dunng 1982. AFUDC increased considerably due to an in-crease in unt;nished construction at the Seabrook Plant. The decream in AFUDC in 1981 was the result of the reduction in the Comparr/s percentage ONnership interest in the Seatxook Plant and a char ge to the net-of-tax method of account.ng for AFUDC adopted in 1981. Although interest expense has increased each year since 1980. some moderat!on. due to dect;ning interest rates. was evident in 1982. The ba!ance of debt outstandng increased l in a!! years due to the capital requirements of the Construction program.
Statementsof Eamings 1981 1980 (Thousands of Dollars) 0; erat:nq Revenues (Note 2) . $440.884 $351.247 Omratnq Exr;enses Operaton Fuel ... . 176.665 137.969 Purctvred and intercnangal Po ver . 78.582 49.279 Other Operat:ng Expen9s . 47.199 39.695 Ma:nterance . 27.162 21.395 Deprecahon . . . . .. 18.663 17.425 R4Jeal and State Taxes on income (Note 3) . 28.215 22.472 ,,, n:her Taxes,. Pnnc;pany Propertv Taxes 17.347 15.705 Total Orera$ng Exrmnsen 393.833 303.940 Cwranna !ncome . . 47.051 47.307 0:r er locone and Dedustions A!!o.vance for Egrty Fund-, Used Dunnq Constructon (Note 1) . 50.053 34.487 Federal Tares on income (Note 3). 23.527 (147) Eautty <n Earn!ngs of Ath!ated Companies . 1.536 877 Chy- Net . 2.672 1.639 Tota! Omer incomeand Deductions 77.788 36.856 incone Before interest Charges 124.839 84.163 lrtmst Charges ' interest on LorgTerm Debt. 50.229 39.711 ' Omer Irterest.1 ... . .. .... .. . 25.989 21.847 Abrance for Borroced Funds Used Dunng Constrtet.on (Note 1) . (28.566) (37.242) Net interest Charges. 47.652 24.316 Net income 77,187 59.847 Preferred Dividend fwquirenents. 19.169 14.022 Earnings Ava: Lab;e for Como on Stock $ 58.018 $ 45.825 28 Weighted Average Shares Outstand;ng (000's) . 2'.883 16.539 Earnings Per Share of Common Stock . . $2 65 $2.77 DMdends Per Share of Common Stock. $2.12 $2.12 See accompanying Nots to Fnanctal Statements. f
Balance Sheets December 31. Assets 1981 (Thousandsof Dollars) Utility Plar.t at Original Cast Electric Plant . ....... ......
$ 563.071 Less: Accumulated Provision for Depreciation . 173.695 389.376 Unfinished ConstrucSon (PriiCpa!!y the Seabrnok Plant) . 772.526 Net UtMty Plant . 1.16?.902 Investments Nuclear Generating Companies . 10.689 Finance Subsidiary 10.803 Real Estate Sutx.carv .' 5.530 Other, at Cost 184 Total Investments . 27.206 Current Assets Cash and Temporary Investments . 5.119 Accounts Recenable-Net . 44.002 Unbilled Revenue . . . .. ... ... .
10.501 Fuel Materia!s and Supplies, at Cost (Note 4) 30.037 Other 19.268 Total Current Assets . 108.927 Other Assets Funds Depos:ted Mh Trustee (Note 8) .. .. 3.041 Cou of Canceued Pilgnm Unit 2 Project (Note 8) . 15.654 Other 11.619 Total ONr Assets 30.314
$1.328.349 _
Crpitalization and Liabilities Cantahzanon (Se separate statements) Common Stock Equity . $ 471.821 Preferred Stock With Mandatory Redemption Requ:rements . 120.000 Without Mandatory Redempt.on Requirements. 49 643 LornTerm Debt . . . . ... . . . 449.071 Notes Payable Retinanced by Common Stock issue (Notes 4, 7) - Total Capitabzation . 1.090.535 Current LiabMttes Notes Payab!e- Banks (Note 4) . .... . 125.600 Long Term Debt to be Ret;ted Within One Year . 5.000 Preferred Stock Redorpption Due With:n Cine Year . - Accounts Payable 31.608 Accrued Taxes . 6.409 Accrued Interest 16.315 Otner 6.506 TotM Current Liab+t:es . 191.438 Deferred Cred is Accumulated Deterred Investment Tax Credits . . . 20.456 Accumu!ated Deferred Taxes on income (Note 3) . 25.242 Other (Note 3) . 678 Total Deferred Credts . 46.376 Commitments and Contirgmcies (Note 8)
$1.328.349 See accornpanying Notes to Financial Statements
l Statements of Capitalization D(wnber 3i, 1981 (Thousands of Dollars) Common Stock Eaurty l Carnmon Stock 45 Par Value Authoraxi-40.000.000 Sha'e3 Outs:and1rg-26.523.683 Shares in 1982 and 23.16.U39 in 1981. $115.978 Otter Pad in Captal . 261.924 Capital Dock Expense . (7.9901 Rela ned Earniros (a) . 101.909 ictal Common Stock Ecuty 471.821 ! Cumu!alwe Preferred Stock Par Value $100 Per Sha:e-Authonzed 1.050.000 Shares
-Outstand:na 631.488 Shams Par Va'ue $25 Per Share - Authonzed '8.000.000 Shares
- Outaanding 6.600.000 Shares Shares Dividend Par Value Outstanding Call Price Wah Mantimory Redempt:on Requ:rements (b) 7 64 % $100 120.000 $105 35 12.000 9 00 100 169.200 106.75 18.000 11 24 25 1.200.000 27 81 30.000 17 00 25 1.200.000 29 25 30.000 15.00 25 1.200,000 28.75 30.000 15 44 25 2A00.000 28.86 -
120.000 lm Preferred Stock Redemption Due Within One Year . - 120.000 Without Mandator / Redemption P.equirements 3 35 % $100 102.000 $100 00 10.200 30 102.00 7,50n 4 50 100 75.000 5 50 100 15.288 100.00 1.943 ( 7 92 100 150.000 103 96 15.000
]
11 00 25 600.000 27.00 15.000 3 49.643 Total Cumulatr/e Preferred Stock-Net . 169.643 Nutes Payable Refinanced by Common Stock kwe (Notes 4,7) . J , b . , , L b , [ v p , . * . irl(nrre accuniutaKd a%Y J vuir/ 1.1978 km the arrremte amount of all d"/dwd3 p>d or (hkared on the reeferred stctk of it e Cornrnr,y dof.rq SUCh [prcd plus $32 000.000. At Da;emter 31.1982. retairej earn:ngs of $91.607.0W mre ror cuyect to div0;rd restricton. rtA ke anran! Sohry Furd torpren*fts for Prebut Stock wth rr,niatorv rahrpt:on r(qumrmnts are as Ut<v,S 1983-$1.080.000' 19db II.560.GH 1985-16.000.000.1986-16.(XA000 arri 1987-$9 000.000 ' } i
E* ten.t o 3' 1981 (Thousands of Do"ats) L ong Term LMot (c) First Mor t.Ry3 Bords (d) Series Rate Maturity H 3%% 1984 $10 237 1 3% 1986 6.886 M 4% 1992 21.668 N 6% 1996 15.638 O 6% 1997 13.871 P 7% 1993 . 13.950 0 9 2000 18.814 R 7% 2002 19.073 9 2004 19.333 i U 10W 1985 14.505 ( V 9% 2006 ?4.775 W 10 % 199.' l'1000* X 12 .1999 9.302* Y 18 1939 .. . . . ... ... -- Ltsr Fist Mortoage Bonds (*) Pledged as Secur.tv for General aniRefunding Mortgage Borvk (19.302) Total First Morto,ne Bonds . . 163.750 General and Returving Mortgage Bor@. A 10%% 1993. 60.000 B 12 1999 60.000 C 14 % 2000 30.000 D 17 1990' 23.000 E 18 1989 ......... ...... .... ... -- l Promir,ory Note; interest at 116% of a Specific Bank's Prime Rate . I Plus G E3%; Due 1983 (Notes 4.7) . .. ... . . .. 25.000 Eurodo!Iar Term Lc /,: Interest at the Rate of % % over the London Interbank Ottered Rate for Three or Sm Month Eurodollar DepaJts. Due 1984. 55.000 Pronussory Notes.17%. Due 1986. . . . . .... 31 30.000 Poliuton Control Revenue Bonds. 9%. Due 1984 . , 5.80" Detx3ntures.15% %. Due 1988 . . . ....... ... - r Nota Payable Refinanced by Debenture Sale (Notes 4.7) . - Total Long. Term Debt . ........... .... 457.550 - Less: Long-Term Debt to be Retred Within One ' rear (5.000) Urnmortrad Premium and Discount . (3.473) Lorn Term Debt-Net . 449.071 Tota Captalimbon . $1.090.535 1 Sm accompanying Notes to Financial Statements ) l (c) Ite Lorwy Term Debt Matuntes ard annual Sinking Fund requirerTmts are as follovs 1983 -$ 6.087.000. 1984 - $ 73.153.000. 1985-
$21.144.000.1936-$43f>82.000 and 1987-$7.058.000. Under tte terms of te First Mortgage Indento,e <s d the General and Refunding Mortgage Irxienture, sutrtantalty all utikiy property of the Company is subject to the hens the eof.
(df Due to ceta:n rectoctions in the Corrpriy's First Mortryyp Irxienture. no sranificant amount of First Martcpy) Borxt may be &md unt:t an operahng beerre is obtamed for Seatrook Unit 1. not antcoated before 1984
l Stat ments of Chinges in Common Stock Equity for ths Three Yurs Ended Dec:mber 31,1982 Other Capital Amount at Pald in Stock Retained Shares Par Value Capital Expense Eamings Total (Thousands of Dollars) Balance-December 31,1979 13.969.133 $ 69.846 $170.355 $(4.090) $ /6.649 $312.760 i Add (Deduct) 59.847 Net income . 59 647 Cash Dividerts Common Stock . (34.840) (34.840) Preferred Stock ... (12.822) (12.622) . Issuance of Comrcon Stouk . . 4.234.789 21.174 44.639 (375) 65.438 ; issuance Cost of Preferred Stock (2.951) (2.951) Ba:ance-December 31,1980. 18.203.922 $ 9' 020 $214.994 $ (7.416) $ 88.834 $387.432 Add (Deduct) Net income . 77.187 77.187 Cash Dividends Common Stock . (44.933) (44.933) Preferred Stock . ...... (19.179) (19.179) Issuance of Common Stock . 4.991.717 24 9:8 46,930 (453; 71.435 issuance Cost of Preferred Stock . (121) ' (121) l Ba'ance-December 31.1981. 23.195.639 $115.978 $261.924 $ (7.990) $101.909 $471.821 Add (Deduct) ,I Net locome . 91.623 91.623 Cash D'vidends Common Stock . (54,202) (54.202) Preferred Stock . ...... (20.998) (20.998) Issuance of Ccmmon Stack . .. .. 3.328.044- 16,640 33.659 (380) 49.919 <
' i issuance Cost of Preferred Stock . . . . . . . -
(2.538) (2.538) ' Amortization of Redeemed Preferred Stock Issuance Cost . 7 (7) - Balance-Decemuer 31.1982. 26.523.083 $132.618 $295.583 $(10.901) $118.325 $535.625 32 Note: On January 20.1983, the Comi.my sold to the public an additional 5.000.000 shares of common stock ISee Note 7). See accompanying Notes to FinancL31 Statements. i
*\ !
I I J o
I t I Statements of Changes in Financial Position For the Year Ended December 31 [ 1981 1980 f e arceof Funos (Thousands of Dollars) l- Fron Goerations Net w.ome . . . . ... ... .. ..
$ 77.187 $ 59.847 Principal Non Cash Charges (Credits) to Income i Deprecat:on . . . ... ......... ..... 18.663 17.425 h Allowance for Equity Funds Used During Constructon . (50.053) (34.487)
Deferred Taxes and investment Cred:t Adjustments. 17.941 4.20_5 Tota! from Operatiore . 50.002 60.726 J From Outside Sources Sale of Long-Term Debt . 57.000 79.995 Sale of Preferred Stock . - 60.000 Safe of Common Stock. . . . . . . 70.214 ^ 64.615 Charm rn Notes Payable-Banks. 17.250 (5.750) Sa!e of Portion of MJ' stone Unit 3 . . . ... ........... Subsequent Fina cirgs Used to Reduce Notes Payable-Banks . - - Tatal f'om Outade Sources . 144.464 198.860 Decrease o Mrking Captal . - 30.010 Total. $194.466 $289.596 Application of Funds Prcperty Add: tons . . . . ... . . . . . . . ... $124.816 $232353 Atwance for Equt/ Funds Used During Construction . (50.053) (34.487) Dividends . . .. ..... 64.112 47.662 Redction of Lon0 Te:m Debt. 5.986 :6.153 Peo ction of Preferred Stock . ... ... Repayment of Atkanas trom Joint Project Participants . 4.595 6.033
!ncreace in Ybrking Capital . ... 36.414 -
Funds Deposited w;tn Mortgage Trustee . 3.041 (13) Deferred Ucwon of Fuel Costs . (6.901) 9.776 33 Increase n Investmert . , 12.427 1.462 , Othc4 /wheations-Net . 29 157 fi Total. . $194.466 $289.596 h crease (Decrease) in %rking Capital Cher than Notes Payable Banks and Advances from Participants Cash and Teinporary Investments . $ 1.390 $ 1.592 Recenables . 1.617 14.288
,s !nventories . . . . . .. .... ......
(7.085) 5.120 Lorg. Term Debt to be Retired Withh Ore Year . 19.467 (23.912) Preferrsd Stock Redemption Due W. thin One Year . - - Accounts Payable . 25.644 (17.636) Accrued Taxes (228) (3.088) [' Other (4.391) (6.374) j~ To'at $ 36.414 $(30.010) Compusman of Property Addtions Joir.h Owned Nuciear Facetres . $ 91.600 $187.927 Nut,! oar Fuel 6.669 17.405 Other 26.547 27.521 i Tota' $124.816 $232.853 See accompenying Notes to F nancel Statements ( i
< )
Notes to FinancNI Statements
~
Ma.r.tenance and repa rs os propc tv a'e cnarged to maintenance exgnse. Re p!acerrents and betterments are '. ' <' Regubtens ard Operations ' charged 13 utelt/ plant. At the t:md 'scpet ties are ret; rect the 1he C7nruny is subject, as tW:n mounting and cthe. Ud of peperty Nte'N plumW W<al W saw me rrnite' to te equ!atory authonty d the New Hampshire charged b the accuruu!Jtcd pr .Msion !nr deprecoton Putkc Utahes Commission (N HUC). the -ederat Erwrgy Fe)ulatcry Commgon (FERC) ano.10 a Imser extent, the Cp> rating Revenuts p,the utihte comnissions in orr g Neu Engtand states Revenues are tused on turg lates, authorced by appbcable wtee the Compan/ does tw e4 / regulatory commesions, which are apphed to customers con-sumpton of electricity. These rates include estmates of the Inetments . cost of energy incurred by the Company in the generaton or The Company follows tne equif/ rrWoJ oi accounting ior purchase of e:ectrom/. To the extent that energy ccSt estimates ] its investments in nuclear generating companies, a whcIly- d.f'er from actual costs incurred, the differences are dewred ou o overseas fironce sutridy( and ? wbJly-r wned real 'and refunded or charged to customers through periodo rate estate sutod,ary The Company owns Wur to stwr. cercer! ~ adjustments The Company records an estimate of revenue for of each of four New Lngbnd nuclear gene *atog compames and. rx3rsuant to purchased prver con'racts, f s entdled to its
# service rendered but not tylbd.
' ]
cwrarship recent of total plant ou'put and is Obkgated to pay , Allowanca for Furds Used Dunng Construction (AFUDC) a sim,lar share of operating evpenses and retutrs or invested AFUDC is the estimated cost. dunng the period of construc. 1 caoita! Appronmately 9 9% 9 7% and 74% of the Com- tron of funds invested in the construction program wtiich is I pany s total enercy requirecrents were funished by them not recovered from customers through current revenues SUCS companes in 1982.1981 and 1980. respectively allowance is not reahzed in cash cur'rently but under the rate - Unhty Plant making pocess the arrort of the a!!awance is expected !c g be recovered in cash over the service hfe of the phot in the Provison for deprecation of uthty plant is computed on 8 , form of increased re enue collected as a result of hrgher rent - stra ght hne method at rates based on estimated service hves cds and schage values of the several classes of property. The dopreciation provisions were equivalent to ove'all effective The Company capitakzed AFUDC a' net-of tax asnuat rates of rates of 3 65% 3 61 % and 3 48% of depreciable property 11.6% for 1982 and 11 % 'or 1981, md at a pros 3 annual rare fer 1982,1981, and 1980. respectdely of 12% for 1980. 34 ,' - During 1980. the NHPUC bsued rate orders which required Cn Def.ot er 30,1982. the Companv fded with the NH"UC the Gornpany to refund approxima:ety $1174).000 to I a '4 s&; for permanent rates designe J to ir crease Nnual customers and wue designed to increase annual non-energ/
, ieverE L;/ approxirrwely $33.400.000 (9.45%) based on a rewrves by approximately $18.355.000. The refunct; were tes! ynar ended September 30.1982. and requested that !he rec 42nized as a reduction in revenues of $4.700.000 in both w mtes become e'fective February 1.1983. ta accordance 1982 and 1981 and $1.900.000 in 1980 with statutory procedureSe NHPUC has susMded the effectiver.ess of the requected rateroendenr.ngs. Under In $982. New HamFSirc tetail customers were bil!ed a leve .
ized energ/ cost rate based on dx-monto projected data .for New Hampshire law, it e Comrnry would in entWed to place- fud ar d purchased power apense. In 1981 and 1980 energy tM requested rates in ef:ect under tend in Ngust.1983. d #;g Unts svere talled tased on estirnates adjusted quarterly. Other NHPUC has not ac!ed on the Company's requost by ihen. ^ retail ciotomers and wholesak, customers ne bdled under fuel Dunng 1982 ,the NHPUC issued rate ordeis desped c ' adjustment clauses. Tne proporton of revenues from pnme to ano ae annual non-energy revenues tr apprmmatefy '/ sa'es associ'ited with energy costewere 47.8% in 1982.
$9.500.000 effectw July,1982 and $28.960.000 dfechve - '
' S4 2% 'n 1E81 and 45.8% in 1980. The d fferences ret lect May.1981. 3 7 changes .h the cost of enerov f d
['
-3 '
l (
I I t I he comparents of income tax experm are as follows 1982 1981 1930 1982 1981 1980 (Thoumndsof Douars) (Thousarxb d Dollars) inchdod in Operattro Experws Difference Betwen Baok and Cunent- F093! $ 24.630 $ 22.153 $ 15 Tax Deprecaton-NormahzW $ 7.910 $ 4.554 $ 4.203 S ate 3.082 3.834 4.518 Accrued and Unbdied Fuel 27.712 25.987 4.533 Adjustrrent Charges (301) (298) (5.957) Deferred Fuel Costs 2.104 (5.443) 4.1 74 D@ed-Fejeral 3.109 5.533 24.516 Costs Assocated with the State - - t620) Cancenation of Pdgnm Unit 2 3.109 5.533 23.896 (Note 8) 124 5.326 - tretmr_ot Tax Cred4t The Interest Component d Adsnments (1.396) t3.305) (3.957) Allowance for Funds Used Dunng Constructon - - 17.093
$ 29.425 $ 28.215 $22.472 Recoupment Rewnue irduid in Other incomc and Recoserable (3.302) 3.302 -
gegy; investment Tax Credt Apphed Current-Fe@ral $(24.706) $(23.733) $ 145 to De' erred Taxes - - 4.383 L4md -Ftesal 45 206 2 Accrued State Taxes (1.419) (1.772) -
$(24.661) $r23 527) $ 147 Unused Tax Net Operatcg Loss Carry Forward (1.642) - -
-_ Tot.t vxrrre Tax Exponm Other (320) 70 2 F*al $ 1.682 $ 854 $18.721 Sta'e 3.082 3.834 3.898 _
$ 3.154 $ 5.739 $23.898_
$ 4.764 $ 4.688 $22.619
= - - - _ _ _ _ The pnncipal reasons for the d fferences between total incorre tax expense and the amount calculated by applying the Sta', ta< egence incluoad above is pnmanly New Harnpchce
'tanch.se tax in October 1982. the New Hampshire Supreme federal income tax rate (46 %) to income before income tax are as fol!ows:
Court duda1 h fmor of the Company in eveturning the 35 tuss for determirvng this tv Accordng!y. the Company 1982 1981 1980 ceaW accrual of the tax as of October 1982. As a result of thc., decision the Corrmny's habd.ty for the tax has been (Thousandsof Dollars) n &ce1 by apprommately $13.200.000. This amount has t 4 m ct;rnhed as a dWerred cred t at December 31,1982 incone Before locome Tax $96.387 $81.875 $82.466 pend rg u!t. mate dspositen by regulatory author ties of the Expected Ta* Expense $44.338 $37.663 $37.934 eMent to which refunds to cuctcmers will be requ: red. Upon increases (Reductions)in Taxes fit al d&rminahon state ta< expense will be reduced by Resuit;ng from
$13200.000 and revenues reduced by the amount of rdurxh orered fsC on dW Espensed for Tax Investment tax credts earned are deferred and amortized to Purrxres (31.107) (23.025) (16.071) a1come over the hves of the related properties At December Net of Jax Method of ,
31.1982 the Company had investment tax cred ts ava>lable c " ( ' } "'"} to carry foraard of appromrmtely $58,000.000 whth expire r e e k^x(U n Book and Tax Depreciaton-Not txtreen 1994 and 1997, and a tax ret operating locs carry Normahzed 1.505 ?.343 742 forward of apprommately $3.600.000 which expires in 1997, w Taies Net of Federal me Tax 1.665 2.070 2.105 The tax effect of diferences between pretax income in the . Juct:nns 2.185 (223) (2.091) financol statements and income subject to tax, which are the reuu!! of f: ming diferences. are accounted for as prescnbed by and in accordance wtth the rate making pohcies of the
'f [ Tax $ 4.764 $ 4.688 $22.619 NHPUC. Accordng y, provisions for deferred income taxes are recognized for all specifed timing df'erences. Taxes finbutable to other timing diferences are flowed through to net income as adjustmer.ts of nicome tax evpease. Provisions for deterred income taes are recognized for the following timing d"erences:
schedule. turther adw3n. es under the revolving credt will re The Company uses borrowings from banks as an intenm quire the concurrence c: all the banks method d financing constructon and working capital needs The Company has a Mancing anangenmmth a group of At December 31,1982. the Company had kne of credt banks, expinng July,1984, whch enables the Company to a reements with New Hampshire banks aggregating borrow up to $20.000.000 by collaterahzing its fossil fuel
$ .950,000 and a revolving credt agreement with other com- invmton mercial banks wnich permits the Company to borrow up to bankers,es. Ratesdiscount accontance of the rate loans plusare based upon the an acceptance current $100.000.000 through November 15,1983 subject to penodic canmissm and facihty and agency fees. At December 31 review by the banks, amounts outstandng under the agee- 1982, the Company was urable to make further borrowings ment mature on November 16.1983. The Company pays unos Ms fac4 pmeng regulatoryapproval of the ccmmitment fees on the revoMng credt agreement and renegot,aton of the collateral provisions thereof.
ma:ntains compensating balances for certain fine of credit agreements. The eftoctrve cost of borrowing under the The Corapany has an agreement with a major contractor for revolv:ng credit agreement, includng fees and assuming the Seabrook Plant (subject to regulatory and other approvals) the available credt is fully utlized, is 116% of the pnme providng for loans to the Company in 1983 of $1.500.000 per interest rate of a specifed bank. month and $1,000.000 per month in 1984, repayable in 1985. At December 31, no loans were outstandng under this agree-The Company has a term loan of $25.000.000 with seven of ment. Hearings being held by the NHPUC with respect to this the co nrnetCol banks participating in the revolving credt Ioan are not completed and the Company .is vreble to predict agreement. The term loan, which matured on January 11 1983, has oeen extended to Apol 11.1983, and the Company whether the NHPUC will approve the agreement. e currently negoteting with the banks for its renewal. In con- Notes payable of $125.600.000 under credt agreements, rt2ction witn that renewal. it is antcipated that the Company's $25,000.000 under the maturing term loan, and $14.000.000 revoMng credt agreement under v.tlich each advance s cur. under the fuel firuncing arrangement were excluded from cur-rently subject to rev.ew by the banks, will be amended to rent labilities as a result of financing transactions completed specify that if at the time an advance s requested, the Com- sutsequent to year end(See Note 7). pany's cash flow, cumulative financings or construction ex-pendtures for 1983, or its capial commitments for 1984. vary Information regardng short term borrowings rs as follows: ty/ certain specifed amounts or percentages from projectons ' 302 1981 - 1980 est forth in schedules furn shed to the banks. waivers of such varations by banks holding tvothirds in principal amount of (Thoumnds of DoHars) y such cred ts would be a prerequsite to such advance. The ef- Maximum Short-Term Borrowings $141.600 $145.600 $134.350 fcct of adherence to these schedules s that advances outstand-ing at any one time dunng 1983 under the revolving credt Amrage Amount Outstand ng would be substantelly less than the $100.000.000 maximum (Based on Month-End spscified in the credt. In addition. if at September 30.1983 it Balances) $104.683 $110.475 $106.038 has been determined that the reduced level of construction of Awrage interest Rate (Including Fees) Unit 2 of the Seabrook Plant instituted during 1983, wi!! be in- At Year End 13 72 % 18.59 % 25.77 % creased during 1984 consstent with the present construction During tre Year 18 66 % 22.57 % IC 13% 1982 1981
/,ctuarial Prewnt Value of (Thousandsof Dottars)
Tha Company has a non contnbutory pension plan covering Accumulated Plan Benela substantially all employees. The Company's pokcy is to fund vested $34.242 $31.729 current pension costs accrued. Costs were $5.242.000,
$4.229.000, and $3.450.000, in 1982.1981.1980, respec- Nonwsted 1.771 1.617 true!y. and include amortization of past service costs over 25 $36.013 $33.346 ears. Amrnulated plan benehts and plan net assets for the ;
defined benefit plan as of January 1 of each year $38.460 $34.857 Net Assets Available lor Benefits The weighted average assumed rate of return used in deter- l mining the actuarial present value of accumulated plan { benefits was 9% in 1bo2 and 1981. 1 l estate subsidary at a current annual rental of $1.254.000 At j Danbs 31,1982. @naMuture msnum lease j Tha Company has certain financing leases for property and payments for noncanceliable leases were as follows. j equipment whch are accounted for as operating leases. The ' capitahzation of such leases would not have a materal e"ect 1983. $ 3.871.000 1984 3.799.000 on the financel statements. Costs associated with leawd 3.135.000 1985 equipment utihzed in construction are capitahzed as a cost of 2.984.000 1986 construction 19 A 7 2.945 000 Rentats charoed to expense in 1982.1951 and 1980 were heter 29 341 000
$4.463.000.'$3.545.000 and $3.065.000. resnective;v $46 075.000 I The Company rents properties from a wholiy owned real {
l f
I C n January 20.1933 the Company soid to the pubhc On February 9.1983. ine Company sold $100.000.000 :n 5 000.000 unes of corr > mon stor:k and ra&d amrotanteh pnncoal amount of 14%% Detentures due 1991 and f $91.475 000 Procmt from the sde were uwd to reduce rased approximately $97.200.000. 9 ort. tem tnrouncn Haa trew shares tren outstanorg for the on9e year 1982, earning; rer 9ee, after O'v'ng e'fect At Decernber 31.1982. $164.600 000 of short-term notes payable ha.e txen excluded hum current labbt:es as a result
? to the related reduction in interest emerce and increaw in AFUDC. would not have cruncyx1 sonacantly of these transactions (See Note 41 l
The Compan/s share of total expend tures included in The Company c unable to predct what effect U anong proo-Unf,rthed Construction for the jon!!y owned nuclear facihtes lems or further administrative or court deosions relaLog to in which it is parbcipating are as foHows: NHPUC. NRC or Environmental Protection Agency act:ons or actons of other regulatory agences may have on the GS2 198,. Company's abAty to complete the Seabrook Plant or on the ut: mate cost tnereof. (Thousands of Douars) Seatmmk Unit I and The complexity of present-day eiectric ut.hty technology and Cornmon FacAtes $ 745 000 $549.200 the extensive t;me required for the construction er generatrng l Smtarook Unit 2 223.100 166.400 . facWtes and for tne complet:on of tre recessary hcensing Mastone Unit 3 48.400 45.600 and requ!atory proceed ogs have compeHed the Company. as
$1.017.100' $761.200 well as other electoC ut kt'es. to make substantal investments i
in the constructon of such faaltes before the hcens4rg and in order to reduce the financing butden of these p;ojects Watory poceedngs are final While it is possible that future developments co;ld lead to canceitation of either one or both on the Company, the Company has red;ced its OAnership of the units at the Seabrook Plant, the Compan/ beheves inat l Interest in the Seabrook Plant to approximately 35 6% from N pr oc Mor pmer in the Company's service area i 50% and Md! stone Unit 3 to approximately 2 8% from 3 9%. and in Ne@ England genera!!y. as well as the area s37nee The Company offered to se!I an addtiorai 7.5% owrership w interest in tne Seabrook Plant, but received no substantal reduce dependence on importcd od, support complebon of the Seabrook Plant. Desp.te a NHPUC staff recommendaton responscs. Dunng 1992, the NHPUC attempted to prohbt the use of proceeds kom the Compan/s financings for construc- t, hat the Company consider cancening constructon of Unit 2 ton of Seabrook Unit 2 until completion of Uct 1 or reducton twM in N opinion d the Company would require obtaining equ:vaient poAer from other sources), the Company beheves of the Company's ownersh:p interest in the Seabrook Plant mat consWcton oWom unas of N plant wW s%n lom o' frorrq; proximate!y 35.6% to 28% a 'evel which the NHPUC overall costs for the Company's customers than would believed was more consistent with the Company's financing cancenaton o Unit 2. capabikbes. Upon appeal of the NHPUC's order prohbting such use, the New Hampshre Supreme Court vacated the if either one or both of the units at tre Seabrook Plant were order concluding that the NHPUC does not have the authonty cancelled the Company estmates that at the present tirre to impote such a prohibiton on financings. Its share of the total Costs for either ore or both of the units Funds receiwd from tne sale of a port on of M;Ustone Unit 3 wmtd N substantally more than its invesu nent. the preose amount would depend upon a number of factors includng were deposited as required, with the Trustee under the First the amount of termination charges and satvag9 and the result Mortgage Indenture. 63 funds are interest bearing and will of negohations in connecton with contract terminabons The rema n on deposit with the Trustee until they are either aDphed Company would app!y to regu!atory autht ntes for approval to the purchase or redemption of outstand ng First Mortgage to amortize its share of total costs oser an appropriate future Bonds or are retumed to the Company following comphance with certa,n other corut ons of the First Mortgage Indenture. penod nd to recwer such cats through the Company's reta:l and who!esa'e rates The Companys constructon program expend tures (ex- In October 1981, the lead owner of the Pilgrim Unit 2 jointly-c!udng AFUDC) are estimated to be $331.300.000 W 1983.
$265.400.000 for 1984 and $426.700.000 for 1985 tl <cogh wned nuclear prating plant cance!!ed construcdon of thrs facddy. The Ampany has a 3 47% interest in the plant 1987. See " Management's Docusson and Anarysis c' and a: December 31.1982. had expended approxinately Fir anml Condton and Results of Operations-Construction $15.90t '90 as its shme of the costs The Company intends Proaram and Finanong Reoimrements" for a dscussion of to mek rwery of its costs incurred to date and trs share of the Company's prqected financing plan. any future add bonal costs of cancel:abon under 6ts contractua Constructon of the Seabrook Plant has reJuired numerous obhoaton from customers over a penod of years inrough apprcva!s and permits from vanous state and federal regu. s' ate ano federal ' x)u!atory auinonts The Company cannot L3 tory agencies. The process of obta.ning these approvals Doct whether ar.1 to why / Ment requtatory authont:es would and pormds has been long and complex, las been con- pamit such recover g Any amounts not so recoverable would sstently opposed by a number of interven,ng proum. has oe charga aga nst ea n,nas in the penod in wh:ch such witnesmd demonstrations at the Seabrook s+te and has dMe<minahon N mado encountered lengthy dolays which have resulted in amaMy inctered costs for the plant
kom 10% to M % for 1981 and 2) recogneed higher 1981 lhe folbung quarterly irJorrmton ts unaudited. and in the mmes ado ^ed by a foal rate orda granted Jamary H. op non of management is a fa:t summary of resu'ts of opera. 1982. These adjustments increased net income by approx-nor,s fa su~ ch penods~ imately $10.800.000 ($0A6 share) Other varetions between In the tourth quarter of 1981, the Company recorded non- quarters reflect the seasonal nature of the Company's recumng adiustments which 1) increased the AFUDC rate business. Three Months Erxid Decerrter 31 Septemter 30. June 30. March 31. 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 (Thousands except Per Share Amounts) Cp>ranng Revenues $102.510 _ $116.252 ~ $101.800 $97.154 $95.736 $103.536 $123.244 $123.942 Operatng income 9.902 11.067 10.158 11,46? 6.804 11.453 16.605 13.069 Net income 24.281 26.765 23.020 17.201 17.985 16.319 26.337 16.902-Preferred Divderd Rec uirerrents 7.103 4.784 1 5.488 4.784 4.780 4.795 4.782 4.806 21.981 17.532 12.417 . 13.205 11.524 21.555 12.096 Earrurm Avalade for mmon Stock 17.178 Aerarp Sha'es of Corrmon Stock Outstanding 26.482 23.158 26.394 23.083 25.682 21.837 23.228 19.402 E,xnings Per Share of Common Stock $065 $095 $066 $054 $0.51 $0.53 $093 $0.62
. Constant Current C I lar C a e folbAing supplementary information is supphed in accord.
ance with the requirements of the Statement of Foancel Cos!- 1982 Dollars 1982 Dottats Accountog Stardards No. 33, Financol Repor!!ng and y Chang;ry Prices. T hese data are not intended 3s substitutes (Thousards d Odlais) y for eamings reported on a histoncal basis; they do, however, . $423.290 $423.200
-Operatog revenues $423.290 omdr sone perspective of the approximate effects of inflaton Operaton ard mainte-reer than a precise measurement of the effects. nance expense 312.362 312.362 312.362 Depreciaton expense 19.558 46.321 50.704 Constant dollar amounts represent histoncal cost stated in ate taxes ierms of dollars of equal purchasing Inwer, as measured by Fe&[Ia the Consumer Pnce Index for all Urban Consumers (CPLU)- Other Ldes 18.476 18476 18.476 The current cost of plant was dv.erm:ned by irdexing each interest emense-net 50.136 50.136 50.136 -
major class of p' ant usog the HandtWhnman Indox of Public Other ocome and Utity Constructon Costs Current cost does not necessanly ~ deductons-net (98.290) (98 290) (98.290) represent the replacement cost of existing produc!Ne capacity . 331.667 358.430 322.813 ence ut.hty plant is nct exoected to be replaced precisely in . knd The current year's provsions for deprecaton on the I"CNa ske ! constant dolbr ard current cost amounts of uMt/ plant were reducton to net j , determoed by applying the Company's deprecation ratcS - recoverade cor.t) $ 91.623 $ 64.860* $ 60477* t ! to the ndexed plant amounts. Current cost amounts reflect ctuncys o specdC prces of plant from the date the plant RecLJton ta net l was acqu: red to the present they d.fier from constant dollar recoverable cost $ (20.794) $ (16.411) < amounts to the eetent that specifc prces have increased more Ga n from dechne in rand'y than the general rate of nflaton ($62.022,000). At purchasing power et net amounts rad 28.000 28.000 Decemter 31.1982 current cost of property plant and eaup i i ment. net of accumu'ated deprecation, was $2.300.013.000 Net
$ 7.206 $ 11.589
! wNe histonCal net cost was $1.432.366.000. Fuel inventones, the cost of fue! used in generation, and the 'hc b0 l e ergy component of purchased power costs have not bEJn of property, plant. l restated frorn their hrstoncal cost n romoal dolm Regulation and equ pment held I,m;ts the recovery of fuel ana Durchased oower costs to actuat dunng the year $139 874 cost incurrec Junng the pered For this reason fuel rnven- Et'ect of increase in tores are ef'ectNely monetary ascets. general poce level 77.852 l i Excess of irrrease in specfc pnces over ; incmase in genera! , price level $ 62.022
*Includ:ng the reduct:on to net recocabte cost. the trcome from contnuing operattons on a constant dollar and a current cost bass wouid have teen $44.066.
Urder current rate noking polices prescrtui by the The statement of earn:ngs adjusted for changing pnces reoMory commcsions to which the Company is subject. revea!S a significant decrease in reported net income when only the Nstonca! Cost of utlhty prcperty is included in the rate deprecation expense is ad;usted for either generaf inflation or txra up]n whch the Company is al lowed to earn a retum changes in speofic prices As referred to earher, the regulatory Thorefore, the cost of oLant stated in terms of constant dolbrs process hmits the amount of depreciat:on expense recover- ' or current cost that exceeds the hstoucal cost of pbnt G not able through revenues to the histonca! cost of the Comparr/ s p'emnt!y recoverable in rates, and is reflected as a reduction investment in utaty plant. This lesel of depreciation pro-to not recoverab!e costa duces cash flows which are inadequate to replace property in f future years or to preserve the purchasing poer of common Dunng periods of infiahon, the holdng of monetary assets wch as cash and accounts receivab!e results in a loss of easy capd invesM As a rW N Company must rhneral purchasing poet tmluse such items w!!! purchase imeasingly rdy on N capU markets to provide necessary km at a future date. The holdng of monetary habihtles such as nancal rmources. This further exposes the Company to the tong term debt resu!!s in a ga'.n of general purchasing poser e% of ofbbon o MonM ocreawdoanong costs b]cause the amount of money requ red to ultimately' settle the Consequently, the Company incurs a sign:ficant purchasing hab htes represents do!bts of d minished purchasing poAer power loss which can be overcome ty/ adequate rate rehet T he reduct:on of utikty plant to net recoverable cost should be through the regulatory process. Wh:!e the rate-making process oftwt by the ga n from the dechne in purchasing power of net grves no recognition to the current cost of replacing operty, amounts owed ThG ga;n results from the Company's sub- plant, and equ:pment. based on past practices the pany stant:a! use of debt fmancing and it should be ncted that this beheves it wl!! be alowed to eam on the increawd cost of its net G stnct!y an econom!C concept ad that such ga:ns will never invmW w n WaceMach are diaced o me tw reaved Five Year Compancon of Selected Sucplementary F nanco! Data Adjusted for Et'ects of Chang ng Pnces Stated in Average 1982 Dollars Year Erej December 31 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 3g (Thousands except Per Share Amounts) Op3 rat:nq revenues $423.290 $467.910 $411.451 $389.384 $385.781 locome ' rom continwng ooe ations (exchrj ng reduction to net recoverable coc!) 64.860 57,374 47.985 35.826 income per average common snare (attar d:v2dend reqwrements on preferrod stock ana excluding reduction to net recoverabte cost) 1 68 1 69 1 91 1.95 Not asmts at year end at net recoverab:e cost _ 577.177 537.049 490.873 459.931 incorm from contino:ng operations (exclud:ng reduction to net reveratMe cost) 60.477 52.899 41.527 27.720 loconv per awrage common share tatter dvdend reau:rements on pre'ered stock and e=clud:rg reducton to net recoverable cost) 1.51 1 49 1.52 1.32 Irtream :n (prea! once level ove (under) increJe n spect c pnces i (62.022) 19.263 93.953 83.655 Net aut3 at year md at net recomrable cm 577.177 537.049 490.873 459 931
'hn tum u.@ e in purcrusng pour of ret amounS omf 28.000 60 552 83 904 81.441 Cmh dWonds aectred par common share $ 2 12 $ 2 25 $ 2 48 $ 2 82 $ 2 8r Ma+et pnce per common vure at year end $ 17.30 3 1528 $ 16 08 $ 19 81 $ 27.78 A,eraue cornumer pr,ce inds 289 1 272 4 246 8 217 4 195 4
%fer<rson not requ.rej tot 1978
)
i J 1982 1981 1960 1979 1978 1972 f Thousands exceot Per Shiye Ama rts) Operanq Revenues $ 423.290 $ 440.834 $ 351.247 $ 292.814 $ 260.751 $ 95.496 I FW ardP:vchaud Power E,p me 224.830 255.247 187.248 147.502 115.418 29.287 Overatra lrcono 43.469 47.051 47.307 44.428 48.338 18.781 L w AFUDC 97.672 78.619 71.729 36.954 15.590 2.075 Net ircome 91.623 77.187 59.847 40.719 36.507 13.472 9 wes of Common Stock Outstano:ng (Aveaco) 25.458 21.883 16.539 12.643 9.275 4.402 Eign.ngu Fer Stue of Conanon Stock Vwerage) $2.73 $2 65 $2.77 $2.56 $3 25 $2 62 Nderd; Per Stwe of Common S*ock $2.12 $212 $2.12 $212 $1.94 $164 f-Not Utnty Plant in Service 404 758 389.376 386.698 377.017 373.338 255.365 t ;r t:roed Construct.cri 1.02/.608 772.526 724.150 518.8R0 346.382 45.862
%tti Arsets 1.615.523 1.328.349 1.254.228 1.010.787 812.101 364.274 l Long Term Detst 637.808 449.071 398.856 344.829 287.252 167.610 l %rrd Stock n Wah Varn1rory Redempton Reentements 177.840 120.000 120.000 60.000 3G.000 -
1 Vsinout Manrbtory Redempton Reqwrements 49.229 49.643 51,316 52.514 53.562 44.043 Common S'ock Equ:ty 535.625 471,821 387.432 312.760 228.307 96.584 fatat Capi'ahzation 1.465,102 1.090.535 957.604 770.103 599.121 308.237 _Notes Payade-Banks - 125.600 108.350 114.100 85.325 17.350 Customer Data (Average) i Total Customers 291.612 293.267- 287.221 279,581 274 959 234.653 h KWH Per Residential Customer 6.946 6.949 7.178 7.317 7.283 6.766 Cents Per KWH-Rrsdental 8.60 8.65 6.69 5.78 5.57 2.71 , Pr: mesa:es(Thousandsof MWH) 1,804 1,766 Re9 dental 1,781 1.794 1,815 1.393 1.762 1.826 1.834 1.646 1,743 1.791 Industna! .l 2.060 2,000 1,992 1.953 1.875 1,024 40 Commercialand Other l Total F ime Sales 5.603 5.620 5.641 5.603 5.384 4.208 i Generating Capabihty-MW . Coal 458 456 456 456 456 456 ! 774 349 I O'l 760 752 774 -766 Hydro 60 60 52 48 48 48 96 98 98 98 97 80 -[ Nuclear (Yankees) 1,117 1.176 1,203 1,145 1.173 875 - Peak Load--Net MW Annual Prime Load Factor 58.2 % 56.9 % 60.9 % 580% 59.5 % 58.8 % l Following are the reported high and low sales prices of the Company's common stock on the New York Stock Exchange for the quarters of 1982 and 1981 and the duidends per share paid during those quarters: 1982 1981 : High Low Dividends High Low Dwidends ! First Quarter 15% 12 % $0.53 16 % 14 % $0.53 Second Quarter 16 % 14 'h $0.53 16'!2 14 % $0 53 Third Quarter 16 % '14 $0.53 16 % 14 % $0.53 i 18 % 16 % $0.53 16 % 14 % $0.53 __ - Fourth Ouarter t
Directors cnd Officers of the Company Directors Executive Of ficers Executive Changes Grge A. Dorr. Jr WAam C Ta" man. 62 (36)* R @ tJ Han mn Rmy.i Crarrran Ch e+ E nuvedrw DJr Wwn Ccr m, - E 'Cw 3.133
- g. y' p ,,' q' q Rot.ert J Ha<nson. b1 (25)
MP-t a d Ch+d Eeut w Chr
~
i Da4as K Hamerknck PtW p S Dunlap 7ce Pe: snt tar Pit A".i-v(o Po> +t Daad N Metra. 58 (33) Ew'w 8 % S2 Wrr h & Ev ". iro E erof W Rwt Cu m 1tei Pn<,o"a K Frnctvfe Chare E Bay ess. 43 (2) F:rancJ Vm Pe:et t N,hM,(p; Ehe m 12/192 D u tto' nr fArnre b;! Coo D Pene G Cameron. Jr . 48 (2) J EP
, 7e pr.y),mt and C,-orat Courrea Hen guy ~'ym pl.; o <t Da':as K. Hamer!-nck. 40 (1) E % i a 12 % :
Harlan L Goode.;n v< e Pmd+ ni tar Pa /ca s pW{3 PA,l*, Cha r mn of tre Ehr1 It e Fet N rooi Ear
- John C. Do"en. 55 (28) E*N of Portro;th Sfm Vm Predent t n twPM :I 12'182 R e,n o;n. NH Henr, J. EiLs. 62 (36) Wf am T Fra n. Jr.
Roter!J Hartmn Smo Vce PeAf1t /Ct' RW 't Pe o et <rd Ch < t E ucu' vo Ot'cer , Enrtw 12 1S2 fAnh p< NH - x 55 (19:
~ , ~ ~ Rotert A Pa ks Dvd N Mern!I Vw Pe1 t Enu' .e Vm Pr. .amt Raymond E Cias,on. 62 (35) E *.rtw 12132 Mrx:re.t., . NH VW P**'T!
Gmtm S Thomas Ann R Mood / Waam T Fra n. Jr.,41 (18) Vce Prenct Nudur Pojucten V(e Re f > r t vm ReJmt E*+ct;.e 5:13 S2 Edron0 S'n 4 d N.v. En4ni irc Warren A Han<ey. 56 (35) Jcho J Lamoron Neua. NH y g p g,g grg n., ,, m Vcr. P P m nt John J Re4 Jr. m 12a 82 hentoni and im mer James L. Newns 48 (14) John J Po ' loc yco p.m o of Gerge Brans;cmre tartr e .NH Rotx3t A Pa ks. 36 (14) vw Penot TrG. 4 4M 12192 g Wuham M Scrantan i PAru > n e a Corm t v1 aorert G OuNene ' Gmroe S Thomas. 40 (2) Cxrcr er N:r e. NH Vce hmomt N2;f+sr Pakton E6rt u 12,t 82 Ear,a d M Shaoro John J Lampton 38 (11) Penet M drt vm Pe+rI I N ,v H.m rhe Co!(ry> u r(nef,..r. NH Gmtge Branscomt'e. 35 (3) na ,trer Wuharn C Ta'! man , Ctarrran Hutert G Ouenette. 51 (,30) M ira:.he2,f. NH Cur pt ocer Huqh C Tutte RM A W.nwa 48(21)
; uw,, bee'cr y To Mrket Grom . inc Chnst.na D Camptcit 60 (32)
DwNH ,, .aq 3,y,a,y R:cha a E Wost Bruce W Wioqe t. 36 (S) b' 'M f ornairy Pr%}fri and Ca mi tdyWyp Aw.tri CCdt "OMr J F PA D/.3-n CO Nrfu NH Da.;u S WAams Charran ard heet lr;teyr gft'/W P3 );r)y; COT Br'stol. NH
+
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _}}