Memo to LIOC participants
From: Irving Like
Sheldon Sackstein has called to our attention, the unfair RFP procedures adopted by LIPA related to termination of the present MSA agreement with National Grid, and its exclusion of him and his organization Action, from attending the Proposers’ Conference, last year, of those utilities who have submitted bids.
I believe we all agree as to the need to make sure that LIPA’s selection of bidder process, will produce the optimal service agreement, meaning that ,( regardless of LIPA’s ultimate governance structure), LIPA should award the new MSA to the utility which is most responsible, with the lowest pricing, regardless of LIPA’s ultimate governance structure.
Shelly believes, as do I, that LIPA should postpone the date for selection of the bidder.
I strongly recommend you all review the LIPA RFP’s issued to initiate the competitive bidding process.
The principal RFP is 110 pages long, & can be accessed at https://www.lipa-usm-rfp.org/default.aspx .
In my opinion, the RFP’s should be materially revised, as soon as possible, to expand the number of potential bidders, and invite competition in the bidder’s performance
of the following terms and conditions.
Proposed $ investments in job creation projects, such as energy efficiency, energy conservation, and renewables, and environmental protection improvements, such as the clean up of former manufactured gas plant sites, Brownfield restoration, and other
energy supply facilities which generate hazardous wastes, or toxic sites.
Proposed % allocation of the investment costs between the utility’s stockholders and rate payers, which will assure a fair sharing of such costs. Instead of the National Grid’s
present unconscionable imposition of the MGP clean up costs entirely upon the
Proposed terms of settlement of the controversy and litigations pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, between KeySpan/National Grid, and the owners of properties contaminated by the former abandoned Bay Shore MGP .
Proposed terms of settlement of the litigation pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, between Suffolk County and LIPA relating to the shoreham settlement Agreement of January 11, 2000.
Commitment to serve public notices, and hold public hearings upon LIPA’s applications for the approvals, and rulings required pursuant to the Public Authorities Law, State Finance law, and General Municipal Law, Public Buildings Law, and Internal Revenue Code from: the following, and other authorities, if required:
Public Activities Control Board
Internal Revenue Service. The RFP calls for a private letter ruling from the IRS on certain tax issues, which prevents public notice, and an opportunity to be heard on the merits of any request for such letter.
Proposed improvements in information technology, including provisions designed to preserve and maintain electronic communications, litigation holds, and to facilitate transparency in operations and costs.
National Grid and LIPA have both practiced a culture of concealment, documented in the pending litigations.
National Grid, and its predecessor KeySpan has withheld from public disclosure, in a privilege log, 8200 documents, and redacted thousands of others, in discovery responses,
relating to the MGP litigations.
LIPA has withheld from public disclosure electronic communications, including back up tapes, covering documents relevant to the issues in Suffolk County’s litigation.
I found nothing in the RFP’s which disclosed the facts related to these controversies and litigations, which raises the question—why shouldn’t the reality of National Grid’s and LIPA’s conduct be disclosed to potential bidders, for the purpose of determining what they propose to do to improve conditions?