ML17277B014
| ML17277B014 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia, Washington Public Power Supply System, Satsop  |
| Issue date: | 11/03/1983 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS (OCA) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8311140473 | |
| Download: ML17277B014 (7) | |
Text
'-November' 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Carlton C.
Kammerer, Director Office of Congressional Affairs FROM:
SUBJECT:
William J. Dircks Executive Director For Operations SUPPLEMENTING THE RECORD OF THE OTTINGER HEARINGS ON FINANCING THE COMPLETION OF WPPSS POWER PLANTS During the hearings held on September 14, 1983 by the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce to examine to proposed legislation to provide financing for the completion of WPPSS power plants, a question was directed to the NRC concerning whether NRC licensing of ownership must be obtained by any new entity created in order to provide the necessary financing.
Our supplement for the record is attached.
(Signed) T. h Rehm illiam J. Dircks
~
~
~
~
Executive Director for Operations
Attachment:
As stated DISTRIBUTION: (w/attachment)
W.Dircks (chron)(6209)
T.Novak.(110)
G.Cunningham M.Murray ESChristenbury Scinto Rutberg (ch Chandi er Paton Hassell A.Schwencer (144)
R.Auluck (144)
A.Vietti (128)
L.Shollenberger (Rgn.
V)
J.Martin (Rgn.
V)
OFC ELD NAME :JRut g/kt
- Christenbury R
nningham:
TNovak
- WDirc s
~
~
~
~
~
~
DATE:I /+/83
. / i/83
/
. /83
- I / /83:) /8/83 83f 1140473 831i03 PDR ADOCK 05000397,I
)'
PDR t',~
1>vh" t.
1'I
~ 4 W I
r>>> 4
~ 1 I
I I
I "~
(
jt 4
( 1>
~
1
~
~
~ ~
4
~P<
- P(f4< <,
fl! 1 j<1'Ij*> (>k("
~
> > t>h >> < 'I (4
((-
N II, I I ft.
N'>
k 1 g )('
(ll I 1>
If
'(
h l >
~ g )t'(>
~r it
>'< <N('i >
I
~
Irf) 1(~
jji 1
<> ~ sl.
hj! "~>I 1
~ <N(1 1
lt 1
1
<j N
I ff~
1 1'
1 <1( >> lh i vh It tl (<>
I
( (
)>>rh
~
jj jt
<)jj t.
Ij
(>4,(lit I
I
> I f
I C ( 8 ( "", I, I'>"
')>'(
> '" i, fl I
1 I 1 >r I tf 'gg,
<'(,
jj >,fr 1'
I ~
I If II I ~
I
~
tj 1
<r
(
1 I '
~
I f /
+
Nf>f(
~
I t
1<
1 l
i
>l 4 lt(< lf 1
tl It If
(
fht>
" *'> (
~
tl
~
~
Insert for the record:
page 68, line 1540 During hearings that were held on September 14, 1983 by the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce to examine the subject of financing the completion of power plants owned by the Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) and in particular proposed section 317 of H.R. 3363 a question was asked of the NRC representative to which we now submit a
supplemental response.
Pursuant to the proposed legislation, one of the methods that would be available as a means for financing the completion WPPSS Units One, Two and Three would be the formation of a new entity, established by State law, that would provide funds for the continued construction of the project.
Mr. Wyden, at page 67 of the transcript, requested information concerning what the impact would be on the licensing of
. WPPSS Unit Three, if the new entity were required to have an ownership
.interest in the facility.
The answer to the question posed depends on the'nature of the activities of the new entity. If the new entity is to be an owner, in whole or in part, of the facility, an amendment of the construction permit or operating license would be required authorizing such ownership.
This involves, after appropriate notice, a determination that the new owner is qualified for the activity authorized; e.g. if it involves simple partial ownership with no control over operation of the facility, only financial qualification need be assessed (there would be no question of alien ownership).
However, if the new entity were to be involved in the construction or operation of the facility, its technical
qualifications would also be evaluated.
If the new entity were to own or control the current licensee then Commission approval under 10 C.F.R. 5 50.80 would be requi red.
On the other hand, if the new entity were to be a mortgage holder or other creditor only, general Coomission approval has been granted by regulation, 10 C.F.R. 5 50.81, and no license amendment would be required.
Until the exact form and functions of the new entity are decided, it is not possible to provide greater detail as to what may be required in order to transfer an ownership interest to this new entity.
HXF257030 PAGE 67
, gap
,. '.f~~+
c 1 )
~~~~~~Aa.
) 15
~1~
l LF,518 j'519 method oE payment they axe using now isn't giving them the:.:
discipline to pay the government when they should he paid.
'o that is a policy that they seem to be resisting, any:
change to, and that goes back to 1981 when we first'rought it to their attention.
Mr.
MYDEH.
Xet me gust ask--let the gentleman from FEPC
- 520
!5? 1 comments
. and X have one other Kuick question.
Ny chairman says we are about out of time, but X have one other vary
.~~ELM
)522
)523 guick and important question.
The gentleman from TERC.
)524 Mx. LANKE.
Pith xagazd to the priorities and discretion,'25 1526 many of these policies were carried forward.
developed by
~~
the Department of Interior when they had authority over 527 power marketing agencies.
They had been carried forward.ta.
)528 a large extant by the Department of Energy.
Jg~
~~
)"
.~F+.<~Ã
>ra 1529
)530
)532 1533
)53<
) 535
) 536 l 537 Some things have bean changed.
I don't recall th'at.
the'evel o~ priority of payment has been changed
~
and most.oK those priorities are found in a,document referred to as RA-6120-2 oK the.Department oE Energy that sets out these types of priorities as to when you axe going to pay for.,what.
Mx.
MYDEN.
Thank you.
One last question to the gentleman from the NRC.
Zf the new entitiesi so-called new entity under, the approach being taken by Nr.
Mc"lure were required to have an ownership
'53'nterest as a, condition fox Mal3. Street participation, how 8c-4 PeeZ
$ 500 1593 1349 1545 1507 1598
/
JQ
-'Ra.
im~
i
~
'~AME:
1539 Mf 1-6 ~
1502 ii4C'1
~
m'*.
1506 HXF257030 PAGE 68 would this a%Sect NRC's licensing oK MPPSS thzee?
Mx MARTIR.
Mx. Wyden, I am going to have to get you an answer Eox the record on that
~
a precise
- answer, but my impression is there would be some administxative changes to the license, but that it would. not involve anything very major, but I just don't know precisely those legal details..
Nr.
OTTINGER.
Mould you. identiSy yourself?
RUTBERG.
Joseph Rutbexg.
Perhaps--X have a counsel here who could probably answer'
- that, Mx. Rutbexg.
V 4
, ~ t~',
~ 'J;.
1550
$ 551 1532 Mx.
OTTXHGER.
How do you spell your last name?
RUTBEPG.
R-u-0-b-e-x-g.
I reiterate what Mx. Martin said.
X would like an opportunity to go bac'k and xe81ect on the cuestioni but initially a new owner would have to be
'V
~
1553 considered by the HRC and licensed.'s a new owner as any 3554 other owner would have to be.
ia W i r, 4 iib r 'r.
'i ri'i, f
i):
L 3555 1556 3557 sure 1538 Vx.
WYDEH.
So the whole process would really staxt over.
Nx.
RUTSERG.
When you say the whole process.
X am not WYDEH.
You said permits?
You. said new owner.
hx.
RUTBERG.
Ho, there would have to be an addition oE 1560 that owner to the new license.
Thexe would not have to be a.
1561 new license, a new permit.
~
i'-',$':
P+H 1562 1563 well.
WYDKR.
we look Norward to your answer on that as
~
~
~