ML19317E817
| ML19317E817 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee, Mcguire, McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 06/28/1972 |
| From: | Mccool W US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19317E818 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912190836 | |
| Download: ML19317E817 (7) | |
Text
-
D0C(ETED g. AUM,17M,1[/7f 9
UskEc UCChL-80D N #
i JUN2 H972 g's -.,.,
3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
[v';^
WL p
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Q'I In the Matter of
)
)
DUKE POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-269 A, 50-270A
)
50-287 A (0conee Units 1, 2 & 3,
)
50-369A, 50-370A McGui re Uni ts 1 & 2)
)
NOTICE OF CONSOLIDATED ANTITRUST HEARING ON APPLICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND OPERATING LICENSES Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act),
and the regulations in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50,
" Licensing of Production and Utilization' Facilities," and Part 2, " Rules of Practice," notice is hereby given that a consolidated hearing will be held, at a time and place to be set in the future by an Atomic Safety and Licensing Bocrd (Board) designated herein, to consider the antitrust aspects of the applications filed under the Act by Duke Power Company (the applicant), for (a) construction permits for two pressurized iight water nuclear power reactors (McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and.2) and (b) operating licenses for three pressurized light water nuclear power reactors (0conee Nuclear Station Units i, 2 and 3).
The proposed McGuire Nuclear Station Units will be located on the shore of Lake Norman, approximately seventeen miles northwest of Charlotte, North Carolina.
The Oconee Nuclear Station Units are located in eastern Oconee County, near Seneca, South Carolina.
- The hearing will be conducted by an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) designated by the Atomic Energy Coninission (Commission) ft 912190 [3 6
~ c.one.i. ting nf Joseph F. Tubridy, John B. Farmakides and Walter W. K.
imnnett, Chairman.
On Septenher 4,1971, the Commission published in the Federal Register a letter from the Attorney General dated August 2,1971, advising the Conuiission that certain antitrust aspects of the operating license application of Duke Power Company for the Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2 and 3 required a hearing pursuant to Section 105c of the Act.
A notice published with the Attc ney General's letter provided that, within tnirty days, ary person whose interest may be affected by the proceeding could file a petition for leave to intervene and request for an antitrust hearing.
In a timely joint petition, dated September 29, 1971, eleven North Carolina municipalities requested leave to intervene and an antitrust hearing.
The ele.en North Carolina municipalities are the cities of Statesville, Hig Point, Lexington, Monroe, Shelby and Albemarle, and the towns of Cornelius, Drexel, Granite Falls, Newton and Lincolnton.
The AEC regulatory staff and the applicant have responded to the joir.t petition.
On October 19, 1971, the Commission published in the Federal Register a letter from the Attorney General dated September 29, 1971, advising the Commission that certain antitrust aspects of the construction permit application of the Duke Power Company for the William B. McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 required a hearing pursuant to Section 105c of tne Act.
A notice published with the Attorney General's letter provided that, within thirty days, any person whose interest may be affected by the
. proceeding could file a petition for leave to intervene and request for an antitrust hearing.
In a timely joint petition dated November 16, 1971, nine North Carolina municipalities requested leave to intervene ar.d an antitrust hearing. The nine North Carolina municipalities are:
- ne cities of High Point, Lexington, ebnroe, Shelby and Albemarle, anc the towns of Landis, Drexel, Granite Falls and Lincolnton. Answers to these petitions were filed by the applicant and the AEC Regulatory Staff.
The Commission has found that consolidation of the hearings held in response to the advice of the Attorney General would be conducive to the proper dispatch of its business and to the ends of justice.
The Commission has, therefore, determined that the hearings should be consolidated.
(10 CFR, 5 2.716.)
Power from the McGuire and Oconee Units is not proposed to be marketed separately but is to be added to the applicant's integrated sys-tem.
The Attorney General has advised that the facts upon which he based his advice and recommendations for an antitrust hearing regarding the McGuire Units are identical to the facts set forth in his earlier communication concerning the Oconee Units.
In addition, a number of North Carolina municipals who ex-pressed their interest in antitrust issues concerning the Oconee Units have also expressed their antitrust interests in the McGuire Units.
Al thov' ~1 there are some minor variations in the makeup of the municipais concerning the McGuire and Oconee Units, the antitrust interests expressed for both units are the same. However, consolidation of the hearings does not mean t.lat Duke Power Company's applications will be considered together as one application or l
s.
4 are mutually dependent. There are two separate and distinct applications pending in this matter and each application will be reviewed on its own ne ri ts.
Consolidation is simply for the convenience and dispaten of the
_ Conmiss ion's business.
The Conmission has also determined that the pending petitions should be ruled upon by the Board in regard to their respective requests for interven ti on.
A pre-hearing conference will be held by the Board, at a date and place to be set by it, to consider pertinent matters in accordance witn the Commission's " Rules of Practice" (10 CFR Part 2).
The cate and place of the hearing will be set by the Board at or after the pre-hearinc con fe rence. Notices as to the dates and places of the pre-hearing con-ference and the hearing will be published in the Federal Register.
l The issue to be considered at the hearing is whether the activities I
under the permits and licenses respectively in question would creata or maintain a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws as specif'.ed in subsection 105a of the Act.
In its initial decision, the Board will decide those matters relevant to that issue which are in controversy among the parties and make its findings on the issue.
A cardinal pre-hearing objective will be to establish, on as timely a basis as possible, a clear and particularized identification of those matters related to the issue in this proceeding which are in contro /ersy.
As a first step in this pre-hearing process, the Board shall obtain from the parties a detailed specification of the matters whi.h they seek to have considered in the ensuing hearing.
. In the event the lloard finds that the activities under the re.pective permits or licenses would create or maintain a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws, it will also consider, in determining whether permits or licenses should be issued, continued, modified, or conditioned, such other factors, including the need for po;;er in the affected area, as the Board in its judgment deems necessary to protect the publ.c interest.
The Board's consideration in the latter regard shall be based on tae record submissions by the parties relevant to that matter.
The applications and the Attorney General's letters have been placed in the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
As they become available, the transcripts of the pre-hearing con-ference and of the hearing will also be placed in the Commission's Public Document Room, where they will be available for inspection by members of the public.
Copies of all of the foregoing documents will also be available at the Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenburg Counties, 310 North Tyron Street, Charlotte, North Carolina.
Any person who wishes to make an oral or written statement in this proceeding setting forth his position on the issue specified, but who has not filed a petition for leave to intervene, may request permission to
. make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CTR section 2./15 of the Commission's " Rules of Practice." Limi ted appearanct's will be permitted at the time of the hearing in the discretion of the B]ard, within such limits and on such conditions as may be fixed by the Eaard.
Persons desirirq to make a limited appearance are requested to inform the Secretary of the Commission, United States Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D. C. 20545, not later than thirty (30) days from the Jate of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
A person permitted to make a limited appearance does not become a party, but may state his position and raise questions which he would like to have answered :o the extent that the questions are within the scope of the hearing as s?ecified hereinabove.
A member of the public does not have the rignt to participate in the proceeding unless he has been granted the right to intervene as a party or the right of limited appearance.
In the event that the Board grants either or both pending petitions to intervene, persons permitted to intervene shall become parties ~;o the proceeding, and shall have all the rights of the applicant and the regu-latory staff to participate fully in the conduct of tne hearing.
An answer to this notice, pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR section 2.705 of the Comission's " Rules of Practice," must be filed by the applicant not later than twenty (20) days from the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
Papers required to be filed in t.his proceeding may be filed by mail or telegram addressed to the Secretary of the Comission, United S ates Atomic Energy Comission, Washington, D. C. 20545, Attention:
- Chief, Public Proceedings Branch,1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C.
Pending further order of the Board, parties are required to file, pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR section 2.708 of the Comission's
" Rules of Practica," an original and twenty conformed copies of each such paper with the Comission.
With respect to this consolidated proceeding, the Comission aas delegated to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board the authority and the review function which would otherwise be exercised and performed by the Commission.
The Comission has established the Appeal Board pursuant to 10 CFR 52.785 of the Comission's " Rules of Practice " and has made the delegation pursuant to subparagraph (a)(1) of that section.
The Appeal Board for this proceeding will be composed of the Chairman and two members designated in a su sequent Comission notice (10 CFR 52.787).
UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY CCMMISSION By Dated at German town, Maryland this 28 th day of June 1972