“NINA’s goal is to work with our partners to find mutually agreeable solutions, not to file lawsuits against them,” said Steve Winn, NINA Chief Executive Officer. “That said, the CPS Energy lawsuit against NINA requires a legal response and we filed our response today. Our mutual goal should now be to withdraw these lawsuits and move forward with effective discussions. We are prepared to act simultaneously with CPS Energy to withdraw our respective filings.”
The focus of ongoing discussions has been on reaching a viable outcome that continues to meet the needs of San Antonio utility customers and preserves the value of CPS EnergyÂ’s investments and the strength of the project.
“NINA is not in a position to buy CPS Energy’s share of the STP expansion for cash,” said Winn. “However, there are a variety of options available to NINA and CPS Energy that would protect CPS Energy from losing its investment and help meet San Antonio’s future need for electricity, should the utility decide to pursue a strategy other than full participation in the project or the litigation that was recently initiated by CPS Energy.
“We want to explore these options to ensure a satisfactory solution for all. Stability and continued momentum of the project is the best way to preserve the value of the investments in the expansion as well as the enormous value to Texas. STP 3&4 will create 4,000 to 6,000 construction jobs while the units are being built, 800 full-time jobs operating the units for the life of the plant and an economic multiplier effect that generates six to seven more jobs across the state for every job at the site, adding another 4,000 to 6,000 permanent jobs in Texas.
In 2006, construction of the two units was estimated to generate $9.2 billion in business activity across the state with $2 billion per year in spending once the units are operational,” added Winn.
While the cost of new nuclear may not fit in the CPS Energy rate structure, NINA continues to believe that the cost of the two units will continue to move lower as presented in November and to be very competitive to meet future demand safely, economically and efficiently.
In addition to disclaiming the allegations asserted in CPS EnergyÂ’s lawsuit, NINAÂ’s filing maintains that CPS Energy is in breach of the projectÂ’s agreements by improperly delaying the project. To support the stability and momentum of the expansion, the filing also requests that a determination be made either requiring CPS Energy to continue to fund the project or declaring that it has withdrawn from it.
“Time is of the essence in making the determination of whether CPS Energy is in or out of the project,” said Winn. “The Department of Energy is only going to select two projects for loan guarantees. STP was number one and now is second with another project close behind. Further delays could move STP to third place, losing the loan guarantee and reducing the value of both parties’ investment to zero.”