For years, Progress Energy has insisted it was in its customers' financial interest that the company repair a gap in the reactor containment wall at its offline Crystal River nuclear plant. New revelations about the company's efforts to save $15 million by performing the repairs itself raise more questions about whether that was a reasonable decision. The utility's misjudgments are resulting in repair costs that will reach at least $2.5 billion, and utility customers could be billed for about a quarter of that. The Florida Public Service Commission should thoroughly examine the situation at Crystal River and ensure that Progress Energy and its insurance carrier — not consumers — cover all repair or replacement costs. Regulators also should consider whether it would be more cost-effective to close the plant.
The nuclear plant has been offline for two years, and it won't generate power for at least another two. For a utility with 1.6 million customers in Florida, the proposed $15 million in savings was modest. As the St. Petersburg Times' Ivan Penn reported this month, Progress Energy in 2009 rejected bids from the only two companies with experience in performing the repairs Crystal River needed.
Public records filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the PSC, and depositions conducted by the Florida Office of Public Counsel, show that in-house staff thought they had the expertise to properly handle cutting into the reactor containment wall — something no other nuclear plant had attempted. They were spectacularly wrong.
...edit for copyright, read on at:...
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/dont-put-customers-on-hook-for-progress-energy-nuclear-plant-repair/1197253
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
