-----BEGIN PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE----- Proc-Type: 2001,MIC-CLEAR Originator-Name: webmaster@www.sec.gov Originator-Key-Asymmetric: MFgwCgYEVQgBAQICAf8DSgAwRwJAW2sNKK9AVtBzYZmr6aGjlWyK3XmZv3dTINen TWSM7vrzLADbmYQaionwg5sDW3P6oaM5D3tdezXMm7z1T+B+twIDAQAB MIC-Info: RSA-MD5,RSA, ABy5PFHMp7S2TapR+ZZIalX8gU3YGCZCV7LsPhw6v2NV/PZTn0dLg/WNo8m//EDw fKUVKbW0yLWvwWDjLZEXyg== 0001079182-99-000037.txt : 19991018 0001079182-99-000037.hdr.sgml : 19991018 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0001079182-99-000037 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 8-K PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 3 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 19991012 ITEM INFORMATION: ITEM INFORMATION: FILED AS OF DATE: 19991012 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: NIAGARA MOHAWK HOLDINGS INC/NY CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0001079182 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: BLANK CHECKS [6770] IRS NUMBER: 161549726 STATE OF INCORPORATION: NY FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 8-K SEC ACT: SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-25595 FILM NUMBER: 99726737 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 300 ERIE BLVD WEST CITY: SYRACUSE STATE: NY ZIP: 13202 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 300 ERIE BLVD WEST CITY: SYRACUSE STATE: NY ZIP: 13202 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP /NY/ CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000071932 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: ELECTRIC & OTHER SERVICES COMBINED [4931] IRS NUMBER: 150265555 STATE OF INCORPORATION: NY FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 8-K SEC ACT: SEC FILE NUMBER: 333-49769 FILM NUMBER: 99726738 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 300 ERIE BLVD W CITY: SYRACUSE STATE: NY ZIP: 13202 BUSINESS PHONE: 3154741511 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 300 ERIE BLVD W CITY: SYRACUSE STATE: NY ZIP: 13202 FORMER COMPANY: FORMER CONFORMED NAME: CENTRAL NEW YORK POWER CORP DATE OF NAME CHANGE: 19710419 8-K 1 As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 12, 1999 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 8 - K CURRENT REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 DATE OF REPORT - SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 Commission Registrant, State of Incorporation I.R.S. Employer File Number Address and Telephone Number Identification No. - ----------- ----------------------------------- ------------------ 0-25595 NIAGARA MOHAWK HOLDINGS, INC. 16-1549726 (a New York corporation) 300 Erie Boulevard West Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone 315-474-1511 1-2987 NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION 15-0265555 (a New York corporation) 300 Erie Boulevard West Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone 315-474-1511 Item 5. Other Events -------------------- (a) On September 30, 1999, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) released its mid-cycle plant performance review of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation's nuclear plants. An NRC public meeting will take place on October 22, 1999, where recent plant performance will be reviewed. See letter from NRC regarding Mid-cycle Plant Performance Review - Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station attached (Exhibit No. 99-1). (b) On October 6, 1999, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation issued a press release regarding an agreement to sell its Albany oil and gas-fired electric generating station. See press release attached (Exhibit No. 99-2). Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits - ------------------------------------------ Exhibits - Following is the list of Exhibits furnished in accordance with the provisions of Item 601 of Regulation S-K, filed as part of this current report on Form 8-K. Exhibit No. 99-1 - Letter from Nuclear Regulatory Commission regarding Mid-cycle Plant Performance Review - Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station. Exhibit No. 99-2 - Press release issued on October 6, 1999, relating to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation's agreement to sell its Albany oil and gas-fired electric generating station. NIAGARA MOHAWK HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES SIGNATURE --------- Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrants have duly caused this report to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized. NIAGARA MOHAWK HOLDINGS, INC. ----------------------------- (Registrant) Date: October 12, 1999 By: /s/Steven W. Tasker -------------------- Steven W. Tasker Vice President-Controller and Principal Accounting Officer, in his respective capacities as such NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION -------------------------------- Registrant) Date: October 12, 1999 By: /s/Steven W. Tasker ------------------- Steven W. Tasker Vice President-Controller and Principal Accounting Officer, in his respective capacities as such EXHIBIT INDEX ------------- Following is the index of Exhibits furnished in accordance with the provisions of Item 601 of Regulation S-K, filed as part of this current report on Form 8-K. Exhibit No. 99-1 - Letter from Nuclear Regulatory Commission regarding Mid-cycle Plant Performance Review - Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station (without enclosures). Exhibit No. 99-2 - Press release issued on October 6, 1999, relating to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation's agreement to sell its Albany oil and gas-fired electric generating station. EX-99 2 EXHIBIT NO. 99-1 United States NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 1 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406-1415 September 30, 1999 Mr. John H. Mueller Chief Nuclear Officer Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Operations Building, 2nd Floor P.O. Box 63 Lycoming, NY 13093 SUBJECT: MID-CYCLE PLANT PERFORMANCE REVIEW - NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION Dear Mr. Mueller: On September 16, 1999, the NRC staff completed the mid-cycle Plant Performance Review (PPR) of your Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station. The staff conducted these reviews for all operating nuclear power plants to integrate performance information and to plan for inspection activities at your facility over the next six months. Normally, the focus of the mid-cycle PPR would be limited to identifying changes in performance over the last six months, and to allocate inspection resources accordingly. However, since we plan to conduct a public meeting to discuss performance following this review, we also have included assessment results from the review process in this letter. At the public meeting, we will discuss performance insights from both this letter and our April 9, 1999 letter which forwarded the results of the last full PPR. Four automatic reactor shutdowns (scrams) occurred since the full PPR. Unit 1 completed its Cycle 15 refueling outage in June 1999 and operated at full power until July 23, when the unit scrammed while performing post-maintenance testing on the turbine control mechanical pressure regulator. On August 1, during plant start-up, the unit scrammed because of electronic noise on several intermediate range neutron monitors. Following repairs, the unit was returned to service and remained at full power through the end of this period. Unit 2 scrammed on April 24 due to a failure of a relay in the generator protection circuit, and again on June 24 due to a failure in the master feedwater control circuit. Both of these scrams involved coincident equipment malfunctions which complicated plant shutdown and recovery efforts. Unit 2 was briefly returned to power following the June 24 scram and then shut down on July 3 to troubleshoot reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) system problems. Following repairs, the unit was returned to power operation on July 23, 1999, and remained at full power through the end of the period. During the full PPR assessment, we noted that operator control of plant evolutions was safe and conservative. Human performance and work control were improving, but problems in these areas required continued management attention. Since the full PPR, operator performance remained safe and conservative. However, we observed additional performance problems in several areas. A number of longstanding equipment reliability and material condition problems challenged plant operations. While operator response to these challenges was adequate, some operator performance deficiencies were noted. In addition, shortcomings in maintenance procedures, planning and work control, and the implementation of engineering support require your continued attention. A number of these problems were indicative of weaknesses in management oversight and the corrective action program. Plant support functions in the areas of radiological controls, chemistry, security, and emergency preparedness continued to be effective. Major plant evolutions were effectively managed and operator performance during routine evolutions and plant transients was safe and conservative. However, the equipment performance problems experienced during recent plant transients challenged the operators and exposed weaknesses in the areas of teamwork, communications, and procedure usage. The limited scope of post-trip reviews and human performance evaluations delayed thorough identification of these weaknesses. Some of the recent operator challenges caused by equipment degradation resulted from deficiencies in the maintenance area. Specifically, deficiencies in maintenance procedures, work planning and scheduling, and work control reduced the overall effectiveness of the maintenance program. In addition, there were instances where poor communications and maintenance work practices adversely impacted equipment performance, most notably with maintenance performed to address containment isolation check valve position indication problems. The station performed several effective self-assessments which identified these maintenance program shortcomings. However, corrective actions, to date, have yet to yield significant results. Engineering performance was mixed since the full PPR. Technical evaluations and oversight of the Unit 1 core shroud repairs were well performed. However, weaknesses in engineering support led to repeat failures and reduced reliability of some important plant systems. The most notable example was the poorly coordinated engineering effort associated with RCIC system maintenance. Additional attention is warranted to address several other deficiencies in the engineering area, such as, incomplete modification packages, untimely modification field installations, and discrepancies in the Inservice Inspection and Inservice Testing programs. As reflected in the results of the full PPR, radiation protection and radioactive waste/material management programs were well implemented. Security and safeguards programs were executed in a manner that protected public health and safety. Emergency preparedness program requirements were effectively exercised during a drill and during an actual fire at an adjacent nuclear facility. Housekeeping practices continued to be appropriate and the corrective action program was effectively implemented in the plant support area. As noted above, performance declined in several areas. Accordingly, we plan to conduct additional inspections beyond the core inspection program over the next six months to better understand the causes contributing to the decline. Enclosure 1 contains a historical listing of plant issues, referred to as the Plant Issues Matrix (PIM), that were considered during this PPR process to arrive at an integrated review of licensee performance trends. The PIM includes items summarized from inspection reports or other docketed correspondence between the NRC and Nine Mile Point Units 1 & 2 from October 1, 1998 to September 30, 1999. As noted above, greater emphasis was placed on those issues identified in the past six months during this performance review. The NRC does not attempt to document all aspects of licensee programs and performance that may be functioning appropriately. Rather, the NRC only documents issues that the NRC believes warrant management attention or represent noteworthy aspects of performance. This letter advises you of our plans for future inspection activities at your facility so that you will have an opportunity to prepare for these inspections. It will also allow you to provide us with feedback on any planned inspections which may conflict with plant activities. Enclosure 2 details our inspection plan through March 2000 to coincide with the scheduled implementation of the revised reactor oversight process in April 2000. The rationale or basis for each inspection outside the core inspection program is discussed above so that you are aware of the reason for emphasis in these program areas. Resident inspections are not listed due to their ongoing and continuous nature. If circumstances arise which cause us to change this inspection plan, we will contact you to discuss the change as soon as possible. Please contact Michele G. Evans at 610-337-5224 with any questions. Sincerely, Original Signed by: Richard V. Crlenjak, Deputy Director Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos. 50-220, 50-410 License Nos. DPR-63, NPF-69 Enclosures: 1. Plant Issues Matrix 2. Inspection Plan EX-99 3 EXHIBIT NO. 99-2 NIAGARA MOHAWK REACHES AGREEMENT TO SELL ALBANY STEAM STATION SYRACUSE, Oct. 6 - Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Niagara Mohawk Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: NMK), today announced an agreement to sell its Albany oil and gas-fired electric generating station to PSEG Power LLC for $47.5 million. The sale price is 1.3 times the plant's book value of approximately $36 million. Niagara Mohawk could also receive up to an additional $11.5 million if PSEG Power chooses to pursue redevelopment of the Albany Steam Station. PSEG Power is a wholesale electric generation and trading company operating in the northeastern United States. PSEG Power is an unregulated subsidiary of Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc. (NYSE: PEG), a diversified energy company headquartered in Newark, N.J. Under a transition power contract in place through September 2003, Niagara Mohawk will purchase electricity from PSEG Power at prices consistent with those negotiated in its POWERCHOICE regulatory agreement. As part of the agreement, PSEG Power will accept the current collective bargaining agreement with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 97 and will offer to continue employment for employees at the Albany Steam Station. "We are very pleased with the results of this sale," said William E. Davis, Niagara Mohawk's chairman and chief executive officer. "For the past 47 years the Albany Steam Station has been an important part of our commitment to deliver safe and reliable power to our customers. We're pleased that PSEG Power is the successful bidder. We believe their commitment to invest in the competitive electric generation business offers the best opportunity for the Albany Steam Station to continue as a power producer and employer," Davis said. Frank Cassidy, president of PSEG Power said, "The purchase of the Albany plant, similar in design and operation to our own Sewaren plant, gives PSEG Power its first entry into a new and important power pool. Our plant operation and electric trading experience will allow us to both maximize the operation of the plant and participate in the ongoing development of the power pool." "We look forward to working with the employees as we integrate the Albany plant into PSEG Power's portfolio and consider future expansion at the site," added Cassidy. The sale is subject to approval by the New York Public Service Commission and various federal agencies. Niagara Mohawk expects to complete the transaction in the first quarter of 2000. "Proceeds from this sale will be used to accelerate the retirement of capital, consistent with our plan to create value for our shareholders," said Davis. Albany Steam Station is a 400-megawatt plant on the west shore of the Hudson River in the town of Bethlehem, N.Y., three miles south of Albany. In operation since 1952, the plant was originally built to burn coal. It was converted to oil in 1970, and natural gas capability was added in 1981. Last November, Niagara Mohawk filed an application with the New York State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment to redevelop the Albany Steam Station. Niagara Mohawk proposed to increase the plant's generating capacity to 750 megawatts, while substantially reducing air emissions and Hudson River water usage. A 'Certification of Completeness' of the application is currently pending at the Siting Board. PSEG Power will consider continuation of the redevelopment efforts. The agreement to sell the Albany Steam Station is the latest successful step in the divestiture of Niagara Mohawk's generating facilities, one of the major elements of the company's POWERCHOICE plan to reduce prices and promote competition. So far this year, the company has completed the sale of its coal-fired and hydroelectric generating stations, and has announced agreements to sell its Oswego Steam Station, Nine Mile Point One Nuclear Unit, and its 41-percent share of the Nine Mile Point Two Nuclear Unit. Investment bankers, Merrill Lynch & Co. and Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities, are serving as Niagara Mohawk's financial advisors for the Albany Steam Station sale. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. is an energy services company that provides electricity to more than 1.5 million customers across 24,000 square miles of Upstate New York. The company also delivers natural gas to more than 500,000 customers over 4,500 square miles of eastern, central and northern New York. -----END PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE-----