|
|
Enron Mail |
California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante and Assemblymember Barbara Matthews
(D-Tracy/Stockton area), held a press conference today to "introduce" two new "whistleblowers" from Duke Energy's South Bay plant.? Bustamante and Matthews have filed a class action suit against out of state energy companies. ? The two employees, E. Robert Edwards (who spent 22 years at the plant as an electrician) and Richard J. Connors (21 years, started as a laborer and rose to auxillary operator), said they had little new to offer but were there to back up the testimony of the three former plant employees who testified before Sen. Dunn's committee.? Among their claims were that the plant did not run at its potential capacity during periods of rolling blackouts, that part supplies were reduced or removed to slow maintenance, and even that the emphasis on safety was reduced.? ? Edwards said that?the?225 MW Unit 4 was kept offline during a period of rolling blackouts.? He also said that Units 1 and 2 were run at 100 MW instead of their 150 MW capacity. ? Connors noted that units were taken offline on weekends, and that employees "dreaded" Sunday night-Monday morning shifts because "they would have to run around" to bring units on line.? A Duke spokesman said after the press conference that they do shut down some of the units on weekends because the state doesn't need the power and the cost of production is higher than the market price. ? The employees also claimed that one turbine which uses liquid fuel was used more than they ever remember in place of steam turbines.? Connors said the 15 MW generated through the use of jet fuel, oil, etc. could have easily been produced by making adjustments to one of the operating steam turbines. ? Ray Boucher, the attorney on the case, said the alleged actions could violate anti-trust laws.? He claimed that documents say Duke bought the South Bay plant because they knew it would enable them to exercise market power. ? Bustamante dismissed the ISO's confirmation that it had ordered the plant to?ramp?up and down during Jan. 16-18, the period discussed by the three previous whistleblowers.? He said that Duke's withholding of electricity and bidding practices had affected how the ISO had been forced to manage power, and that it is essential to examine bidding records during that period. ? Boucher said even though the state is looking at $9 billion in alleged overcharges, the class action suit could ask for more.? "I think it goes deeper than that (the $9 billion)," he said. ? Bustamante made two incorrect statements during the press conference.? He tried to bolster the credibility of Connors and Edwards by saying that they had been kept on the job for two years after the plant's takeover by Duke, which shows their value.? He was reminded that AB 1890 required keeping existing employees for?two years.? (Connors said he was offered employment by Duke but turned them down; Edwards indicated he took an enhanced severance package.) ? The second was in regard to a claim by one of the former employees that he had been told that the spare parts supply had been reduced in order to lower "inventory taxes."? Bustamante made the comment, "We don't have an inventory tax."? It's true that California no longer taxes inventory (in retail stores, for example), but counties do charge an ad valorem tax on on-site business property. ? I sat a couple of seats away from Tom Williarms, spokesman for Duke, who?made under-the-breath comments?through most of the press conference such as "That's so wrong."? Following the press conference, he held an availability in the hallway.? He said that there was a fundamental difference in operation the employees didn't understand:? The South Bay plant now serves the ISO market, while it used to serve a targeted southern California market under SDG&E.? Williams also claimed the plant was under severe environmental constraints for NOx that limited its available run time. ? Duke, he added, did not want to charge the high prices -- over $3,000/MWh --?it did but included an 80% credit premium because the utilities were not creditworthy.??To date, he said,?it has only received 1.8 cents on the dollar.??Williams said Duke?tried to sell the power to DWR instead at a much lower?rate, but was refused.?Duke has since refunded some money, Williams said,?and?has offered to re-bill at FERC's price-mitigation rate.
|