( this is an open letter to Ms. Spotts, please feel free to post in its entirety, thank you)

Dear Ms. Spotts,

My name is Don Curran, I am General Manager of the Crockett Cogeneration plant, located in Crockett, California. I saw your report on your visit to Crockett, and I am writing to correct some misconceptions.

I have no personal or financial interest in the Calpine plant in San Jose and I have no opinion as to whether it should or should not be built. My intent is to give accurate information about the Crockett Cogeneration plant (CC).

I lived next door to the plant for my first six months as general manager, I am active in Crockett community functions, and I have friends and coworkers who live in Crockett.

1) First of all, let's address ownership:
CC is owner by a limited partnership. Neither Bechtel nor Calpine have a financial interest in the partnership. Bechtel was hired by the partnership to design and to manage the construction of CC. The business relationship between the partnership and Bechtel ended with the close of the warranty period. The only relationship between Calpine and the partnership is that they are competitors in the power generation business.

2) For the rest, I will more or less follow the order of items in your report:

a) construction of CC was started in 1994. The plant entered full commercial operation in May of 1996. Ms. Spotts, you state that the plant is dirty and streaked. The plant is not dirty or streaked and the paint is in like new condition. I believe that you were looking at something other than the CC plant. I would suggest that you were looking at the sugar storage silos which belong to C&H Sugar and have been there since the 1950's. These silos do have a light coating of raw sugar dust in places, which has the appearance of rust streaks. The silos were painted in 1996 and the paint is in excellent condition under the coating of sugar dust.

b) a small point regarding your survey of the neighbors, which you refer to as 'a small representative sampling'. Your sampling would be more accurately termed an accidental sample. It would be like doing a survey at the state capital and concluding that everyone in California is a politician.

c) regarding the noise from the plant:--
-- the plant was designed to a standard for noise exceeding the requirements of the USEPA.
-- the plant was tested and was found to meet those requirements
-- all noise complaints are reported to the CEC, per the conditions of the permit.
-- there have been no noise complains for over 12 months.
-- during the first 12 months of operation, there were 2 occasions when the allowable noise level was exceeded, for about 2 minutes each time.
-- most people cannot distinguish between the sound of the plant and the background noise from Interstate 80. In fact, most of the noise complaints were made during periods when the plant was shut down.

d) it is true that there are people in Crockett who are still upset about the plant being here. And there are people in Philadelphia who are still upset about the A's leaving town. (my Dad , for example).

e) any alarms or sirens are not from CC, with the exception of the monthly plant fire drill. The neighbors may hear alarms and sirens from C&H, the fire station, and sometimes even from ships and boats on the Straits. At CC, we use two way radios for normal communications.

f) the rental housing situation is a long term issue in Crockett predating the power plant. However, some people see the Crockett situation as an opportunity, as some individuals own several rental properties. And the ones I know live in Crockett, one close to the CC plant. At least one of these landlords has bought additional property close to the plant since 1996. Not everyone sees the Crockett rental situation as a problem.

g) "Hell's Angles and drugs". This is another old problem in Crockett. And the drug and gang problems in Crockett have been reduced by the presence of the CC in Crockett. Prior to the plant, Crockett had one part time sheriff, shared with several other towns. There was police coverage for part of 8 hours out of the 24 hour day. This is partly the reason why there was drugs and 'Hell's Angles' in Crockett. Now, half of the county's share of the CC's property taxes go for police for Crockett. Now there are 31/2 officers providing 24 hours a day coverage. I haven't seen the motorcycle gang types in town since the end of 1996. If anyone in the Town of Crockett tells you they don't know of any benefit that they received from CC, ask them about the sheriff's deputies.

h) many of the existing houses in Crockett have been extensively upgraded and modernized since CC was built. At least 2 new single family houses and 3 condo type dwelling have been started since CC was built. A 36 unit senior citizen apartment house will be built on a vacant lot in town. And 6 condo style units are planned for a lot across the street form the sugar silos. People are investing in Crockett real estate.

i) the CC project has contributed approximately $15 million directly to Crockett, with about another $12 million in 'return to source' property taxes committed. (these numbers are approximate present worth, as the funds will be available over a period of years). I have a good idea of where the money went, even if some Crockett residents say they don't. The majority of it ($9 million, paid $300,000 per year, with inflation adjustment, over 30 years) goes to the Crockett Community Foundation. The Foundation is governed by a board made up of Crockett residents who are elected by Crockett voters. Some of the things the Foundation has invested in are: computers for the local schools, equipment for the fire department including a new fire engine, repairs to the library, repairs to the community center and repairs to the historic first homestead. The foundation also provided seed money which resulted in a $2 million grant to build the senior apartments. The Foundation is keeping half of the annual contribution to build an endowment , so that its work can continue long into the future.

CC also paid to underground the overhead utilities on Loring Ave, paid to paint the sugar silos, paid to build a public fishing pier at Eckley Park, and furnished a computer lab for the local high school. (as part of the efforts to improve the community, C&H Sugar spent $1 million to restore a town park, they contribute annually to the Foundation, and provided the funds to buy and to remove a derelict apartment building).

j) regarding air pollution:
our limit for CO emissions is 5.9 PPM. Most of the time we emit 4.0 PPM or less. The normal ambient CO levels around here is 2 to3 PPM. At times the ambient levels are 10 PPM or higher. At those times, the plant is still emitting 5.9 or less, and is actually removing CO from the air.

I would need to wonder about anyone who claims that they can sense increases in the CO levels, as CO is odorless and invisible. When the CO catalyst was clogged, it was a problem only for the plant and not for the environment, as the plant was shut down instantly for repair when the catalyst was clogged. (that was in early 1996 ).

k) regarding property values:
the town of Crockett is surrounded on 3 sides by regional park open space. The town is about 11/2 by 3 miles in size. The houses at the top of the hill (south end of town) were selling for about $250,000 in 1996. This summer one is on the market for $366,000.

Some years ago, the oil refinery closest to Crockett released toxic chemicals which hit the town. That incident had a major impact on property values. There was also a significant slump in the California real estate market in general. ( I paid less in 1996 for a house than the previous owner paid for it in 1989, and its not in an industrial area).

As for CC's impact on real estate prices, I offered tours of the plant to a group of long time Crockett residents, and some of them could not find the plant. I believe that the plant's direct impact is neutral, and that's its indirect impact (through financial contribution) is very positive.

l) regarding the 'little park'.
We call it the 'public viewing plaza' or plaza for short. The CC plant covers a total of 21/2 acres. There was no community interest in having a larger plaza, because if there had been, the plaza would be larger. The plaza is a fair percentage of our total property, and the community did not want us to enlarge it by tearing down a house.

m) regarding Ms. Spott's personal concerns:
--my observation is that property values are increasing in Crockett. This is an industrial area, the sugar refinery has been here for 100 years and is the reason that there is a town of Crockett. It is my sincere opinion that the CC plant has made an overall positive contribution to property values.

--the plant meets all the CEC requirements for noise. From my experience and observations, most people cannot distinguish between the plant sound and the background noise, and many cannot tell if the plant is running or shut down.

--the CC plant replaced the 1950's vintage boilers at C&H Sugar. CC meets the most stringent emission limits in the world today. The local air is cleaner now than it was before CC was built.

I hope you find this helpful. As I said, I am not advocating for or against a power plant in South San Jose. I have no interest either way. My only reason for writing is to correct any misconceptions about the town of Crockett or about the Crockett Cogeneration Plant.

While I am not at all interested in debating the merits of a power plant in your area, if I can help clarify any questions you may have about this type of plant, please feel free to call me at 510 787 4102. I would also like to extend an invitation to you and others concerned about the project in your area to visit and to tour this plant.