ML20149M059
| ML20149M059 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1996 |
| From: | Blanch P AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149M049 | List:
|
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9612120104 | |
| Download: ML20149M059 (3) | |
Text
. -. _.
i From:
PAUL M. BLANCH <PMBLANCH91x.netcom.com>
To:
JZ <JAZWOL9aol.com>
Date:
11/4/96 4:13am l
Subject:
Maine Yankee John:
I understand there was a Commission meeting recently about MY. Can I get a copy of the transcript or can you have someone put it on the NRC OPA page?
Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant s
135 Hyde Rd.
West Hartford CT 06117 Voice 860-236-0326 l
Fax 860-232-9350
?
i i
i l
i i
f I
6 1
i i
4 i
l 4
9612120104 961210 PDR ORG NRRA 2
l i
From:-
PAUL-M. BLANCH <PMBLANCH91x.netcom.com>
-To:
GERRY REARDON <SAFENUKE9ix.netcom.com>
{
Date:-
11/4/96 7:21am i
Subject:
Letter to kenyon HARRY S.
BLANK.
EIGHT GRISWOLD COURT i
WATERFORD, CONNECTICUT 06385 i
203-447-8052 November 2, 1996 l
Mr. Bruce Kenyon i
CEO & VP Nuclear Services Northeast Nuclear Energy Co PO Box 128 i
Waterford, CT. 06395
)
'Mr. Kenyon, I sit here and try to imagine what thoughts went through your. mind when you j
informed Mr. Blanch at a recent meeting of your decision not to take back those ex-employees involved in protected activites and laid off in January 1
}
1996 under the guise of a cost reduction.
Your reason for your decision was allegedly "by taking these individuals back, it would serve as an admission of guilt and risk weakening NU's legal position".
1 Mr. Kenyon, with your arrival, it was assumed that perhaps the atmosphere of intimidation at Northeast Utilities had changed. _With your recent decision, such does not appear to be the case. The attorneys and accountants i
are apparently orchestrating the show...again. Northeast Utilities appears once more to be more interested in "its legal position" tho in people.
I-The Justice department is investigating NU for a reason Mr. Kenyon.
They i
are not doing so to provide Northeast Utilities with an award for treating employees in a fair manner.
They are investigating because the NRC has concluded criminal actions.
Regardless of the legal outcome, the perceived image has already been created.. The public regards NU at best i
as a " bully", and at worst as incapable of operating a nuclear l
facility... safely.. The NRC's Hannon report painted NU management as l
" arrogant".
I Now that you have made the decision not to bring back these employees are you l
also going to look the other way and ignore taking any actions against those individuals who performed these apparent acts? These same people are still i
in charge as long as you continue to "look forward".
l The image that NU has created will present a rather large hurtle to overcome to restarting ANY of the units.
You had an opportunity to modify 4
^
those images and chose apparently to listen to your contract lawyers.
[Perhaps this is the same legal department that caused Northeast i
Utilities to be in their current position) The attorneys surely will be the victors regardless if they collect from NU or the ratepayers.. Keep in mind Mr. Kenyon that the lawyers will profit regardless of the outcome of j
Northeast Utilities, even to the point of profiting from NU's possible 3
I w
,,;e.g--
bankruptcy.
I am disappointed in you beyond what words can express.
I had hoped that you as newly appointed captain of the ship may have been able to change the course which NU is currently exploring.
Others before you have embarked on the same course as you have chosen, one of " arrogance",
and have eventually found themselves without a ship.
At various public meetings you promised a return to the original method of operations where people were first, the plant's safety second and the bottom line third.
You had promised to " walk the talk" and not merely continue the mistakes of the past. Well. review your performance in this regard and ask yourself in front of a mirror if you did the right thing.
Your statement concerning your " reluctance to revisit past mistakes" I assume was not reviewed by the legal department as it does admit there were i
mistakes.
These past mistakes, like Millstone's past mistakes will not go away. They will continues to cast a dark cloud on M111 stone's future, and until these past mistakes are corrected, Millstone has a very dim future.
You claim you must remain " focused on getting Millstone back in shape".
It's becoming highly doubtful if the enormous task of returning Millstone to a shining star can be accomplished when such a small mistake as what occurred in January 1996 has taken 10 months to come to this junction and still canr,et be rectified.
Mark down on your calendar Mr. Kenyon the date of your meeting with Mr.
Blanch and look at it as a junction in the road.
Time will tell if you took the right road.
Apparently you have made your choice.
I will not take your valuable time any longer. This will be my last correspondence to you, especially given the fact that you have been unable to even find the time to respond with even a form letter to my previous ?.wo letters.
I cannot truly wish you success, as you have chosen to wish me hardship and pain.
- Regards, Harry Blank Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd.
West Hartford CT 06117 Voice 860-236-0326 Fax 860-232-9350 l