In light of recent publicity regarding Concord’s gasholder, there remains one critical missing piece to the puzzle, and that is the costs associated with demolition/site remediation and preservation, and the absolutely critical role that the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission plays in all of this.
Preliminary cost estimates are available, now, for both options. However, these estimates are in a state of flux, which will have a profound impact on the option ultimately chosen.
Estimated costs for demolition/site remediation are not complete due to the exceedingly difficult task of estimating the extent of contamination remaining under the footprint of the gasholder without first demolishing it. And there is the potential that costs for demolition/remediation could conceivably even exceed the cost for preservation, but this will not be realized until the structure has been razed and all remediation activities completed in conformance with state regulations.
Governing the option of demolition/remediation is a historic “settlement agreement” between EnergyNorth Natural Gas and the PUC in 1999, which prevails to this day.
It establishes that any and all costs associated with site cleanup and remediation are recoverable costs. That means that, subject to approval by the PUC, we (Liberty’s customers and ratepayers) will pick up the entire tab for cleanup through our rate structure.
However, the cost for preservation, since it is not being mandated by the state or any set of regulations, nominally is not recoverable. In my recent discussions with the PUC, they have indicated that the lower cost estimate (between demolition/remediation and preservation) would be the amount that they would support to be passed onto Liberty’s ratepayers. Any difference between demolition/remediation and preservation would have to be borne by third parties (private fundraising) unless Liberty contributed some of its own corporate profits toward preservation, which their predecessors have done previously. In doing so, this would certainly showcase their values within the community for good corporate/ratepayer sharing of financial responsibilities.
Time will tell.
In light of Liberty’s plans to submit an application for demolition, it is essential that the cost estimates for both options be updated as soon as possible. Having prior experience with this type of waste, at multiple sites in multiple states, I am willing to volunteer my time to meet with officials from the city, Liberty, and their engineers to update the costs for demolition/site remediation. The clock is ticking.
(Ron Rayner, a professional engineer, retired in 2017 after running his business Environmental & Industrial Waste Management Inc. for 21 years. He lives in Concord.)