ML19319B326
| ML19319B326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse, Perry  |
| Issue date: | 03/26/1976 |
| From: | Rigler D Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19319B321 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001150807 | |
| Download: ML19319B326 (7) | |
Text
-_
o f$ s/(jg >'IIh f,,.
c t.
,'R.,
/
d 1
UNITED STATES O? AtR;RICA C
!!UCLi AE m:CU/1.'ICW CCl&l?.5CI'XI g
Q*
A i
~
s 3
m U :' 'D' '
UC-In the II: ster of 4
T:IUTCO EDISCN C0;n % Y cud i
5 CLiWELTdiD ELEC1'EIC ILLU:st:ATI:!G Co.
3 p# ~ ^ r* -
l fi' ic.* A e,
~.,,,
6 (Devir-Besco. T!aclcar PO*.far Statica
>*"h,-
Units 1, 2 and 3)
)
7 and
)
0 CLEVELA!!D ELECTRIC II.T.UMINATING CO.
EC MOA 9
ot al -
- 50. 351A 3
10 (Porry, Nuclear Pcwor Ple.nt g
i Unit <f.1 and 2) 8 11 l
s
}-
12
+
1
- i#3D D # N'*'i 'S
C
'r 13 7915 Eac h.n Am uvs a
Silver Spring, Mc.r;rl;gd I
g,g
, I, IWW' 30 E'*'N W']
15
}
The hearin; in the above-en':itled matter was 16 -
g reconvened, pursuant to. adjourpr.ent, at 9 :30 a.ut.
18-BEFODE:
~
f 1 \\
MR. DOUGLAS RIGLER, Chairman 19 MR. JCEN FRYSIAK, I%.6 er
~
20
- q m' m' m MR.' IVAN SMITH, Mar 6ar.
D OJ 21 n
o o
JLl o
APPEARANCES:
n g-e !
(As heretofore noted.)
1-U 23 6
I 24 1
80012go[0 I
fxN/d / Y L, il
'i 1
Qg,h 14*T L - M~M i
e.
' ~
7473 an2 1'
A Yes, I did.
2 Q
Do you'know who drafted that'ordinaacc?
3 MR. BUCIEGIRI:
I object to that.
4 What relevanco d.osc it have?
I c:n aus.c of 5
nothing en that subject in the ateter.ent of the nature of 6
the case f31ed by the city of C1cvelr.nd.
7 MR. EJELMFELT: This'line cf tout 3 cony is gcing 8
to the' problems that the City has had in financing its 9
electric system with respect to interference by CEI.
10 The formulation of a bond ordinance being n
,j technical matter;'the changes and cmendsants in an ordinance 12 also involve the same technical field.
13 The City will be attempting to Scmonststate 14 ordhances 7-dat de amenhto to de cdma e
15 difficult for the City to sell its. bonds, and thct while the..
City at the hearing was represented -- or the City's bond councel who prepared this technical matter una at the meeting, bcnd counsel which is also the fic: that represents CEI, when asked about the effect of these amendments l
21 made -- qave no indication to CiW Co.2ncil mc.nbors that 22 these ordinancca or these ar W en" s '.rould m&he it nore difficult, perhaps impossib1? fur E;9 City to fintnce the f
rehabilitation of its syntes.
~
y t
-4 g
MR. BUCID:AN:
May I racpond, Mr. Riy3er?
I
7474 scrd31 CEAIK4AN RIGLER:
Just a~minuto.
2 Mr. Hjel=fcit, will vcu indicate where in the p:54T statje of the City of Cleveland's caso th :sn alle.gntions c.ro 3
I 4
made?
Or, ths City's attempt to rely upon thi.e prego::-d q
5
'line of ev3 dance is set forth?
6 Mr. Euchmann, I think the record chould in*ict.t.t-7 that an interval has'gone by.
I won't cut ycu eff from SCA.X P 8
continuing in your sesse.
9 MR. HJEETILT:
I am ready to rerpOnd now.
10 As pointed out in our September 5 filing, v.ir 11 did not there undertake to eluciriata a dascription of 12 all of the evidence ws would be prosenting on all of the 13 Parties in controversy, but rathor to set em' the nature of 14 the case we intended to prove.
15 In the nature of the case we pointad cut that wa 16 intended to prove'-- and this is certainly clear not 17 merely from the September 5 filing, but I think it sces 18 back to the prehearing conferenccc and to the cr5 cment on gg discovery requests, that one of the problems the City faced 20 was the ability to rehabilitato its systs.
And that this was tied in not only with the lack of an interccnnection 21 which would provide the City with an opportunity to 22 an an p m,
.or maden as 23 I
declining revenue base which made it :: ore difficult to i
24 i
finance the expansion. And uith this declining re'fenue base g
l 7475 I.
34
'I and the inability to finance. - or the difficulty da i
2 l
financing cdditional generation or rehabili.:nticn tec hrt.r.::
i I
e 3
CEI noving to cunso the City to sell its bor.d's en the 1
4 open marr.et rather than to the sinking fund which ?r. Er:t 5
indicated was the mora nerac;. method of prceneding.
i 6
CHAII:!iA}i RIGLED:
Uc11, but my cruc. Stir.i at l
I 7
where in the statement of the City's case ic tiriti al.i.Lg'.0 or r..:A l l
c forth7 i
9 MR. HJEIJIFELT: For excr.iple, on tha bottom of pays I
to 21, tha last sentence, talking about tha reducticn in I
fI Cleveland 8s load reduces Clove. land'= dar.and for 1.cwer, l
I 12 limiting the size of gancratin;r units that can rc inctclica j
s I
13 and reduces its revenue Snea needed for fins.ncing iactant tion.
g of bulk power generating units.
EG Wat does that have ta b - in i
c i
15 16 y ur contentions with reapact to the passage of th : bcnd I
ordinance?
17 1
18 We understand your point aboct the d Ni.*inhing revenue base.
There has been evidence presented on that 39 p int.
But you have been unable to show me anything 20 specific _ in' tlie September 5 filing which pute the ?.nnlicante 21 on notice that we are going to be required to defend again.ct g
a specific charge that they, in essence, sa M+qqp,th 1973 i
bond incue.-
aa1 g
M1 0 ~9 T
A 2s
_1 v
_s
1 BY HR. HJEL'EELT:
2 Q
Did the inability to sell the to -ds tJ.*/ cr th?
3 City'c chil.ity to rehabilitche its syst.v.a?
!tR. BUCEG1H!:
I object..
l 4
i l
5 I thought w. vare new en my t atice; h ttrikt 6
CHAIRNAN RIGLER:
I er.: goir.g to 1'::
tb a Otti.'t.4 i
7 lins and then we will take tha entire is.un urd.er riviec.ir.4t, i f
I 8
Mr. Bucha2'n.
g MR. BUCE* ANN:
I't1 sorry, I micindcreted.
]
i 10 CHAIRMAN RIGLER:
I chould have,baan c3enrer, j
l 11 I will hear the entire lins an?. then the Es:cM i
l will break and consider it.
You may not get an i:nirlie.tv 12 "7 U" 13 MR. EUCK9.RU:
I am sorry, I mimm40.rs4 cd.
g4 15
-m s m y I inte m ptsa yo'2, F*a. Hj W c h.
t
- "Y h"#8
- ^
16 I
i (Whereupon the reporter read f c= 0.e rscord l
g l
as requested.?
18 THE WITNESS:
Abcolutely, since the intent of 99 20 the capital dollars was,to rehabilitate the systnm.
MR. HJEEEELT: That is the end of that line, 21 Did you want to break now?
y CHAIR!1AN RIGLER:
No, I would prefer to continue.
MR. BUCHMANN:
I would like to be pfi My 3 von y
rule,if need be.
25 o
mD 9
i v
.. kf a
(
i 1
.s 4
event we grant your taction.
^
I MR. BUCEL'uRI:
Mny WO have f1*/:'r haitrate'??
2 l
(Ra:ecc) i 3
'i.he Ecard hac had Cn.7 pc4Y.'.'.:i&'*
i CELImW7 R271.'c's:
4 i
to confer during tha recess with rocptet to tno ve: tic:1 to 5
t.'
l strike,and we aro Scing to grn?.t the notien to :~t.rik.t 6
n:h d tectimony coparated by the two carkings which V:
7 the reporter to mark on the tranceript, nar.civ thht lins 8
of testimony dealing with tha bcnd crdina.nco.'
9 And the reason for the' ruling i's -tho YJity's
.to I
failura to coc: ply with the Board.'s procedural ruling j
i 11 i
regulating f.he 'ccurse of this p.icceeding with rcfsr.7.e:c. to 12 5 fils.
the intervention letters and the Septe.=ba:
13 i
We -find that the city did not ad'. nra te cr-
.g4 instructio s with rospect to notification.
i.
15
' The. Board has considered.whether, in vi:r.r ci 16 the evidence, it would be worthwhile to pe::2it the City g7 to make'a plefthat-this evidence be concidored on the j
18 In dog so ve hava L..~. to t.1hc into 19 basis of good cause.
acccunt the overall probative c5fect of 'the evidenca us
- 20 Prasantly presented.
21 Although argu:ble inferencac cocid be dr:nen n
incuffic::.ent nonetheless the overall usight of the evidence i:
23 pinion to make the exerciso of consid' crc f cc e51 0 l
in our 24 WW d cause appropriate at this t2me.
9 I
g 25
?! D l
J G]
_1 1.
h a w
\\
=
s I
l i
, i;.
... 75c0
~.
~
So that for thoco roscon=, the motion to strike 1
2 is being granted.
(End of testimony - dasJ.gnated b1 Chsi...:1.n. )
MR. BUCHHiLYti:
Thank you, ycur Ucnor.
3 Tbc SF.P.ff his no qu?ed ens for MR. GOLDBERG:
4 Mr. Kt:duhis, i
5 MR. HELViB BERGER:
Ihe Dopartnant *:Oc1= niric G
like to note on ths record that we hav:
o ;ue-tienc 7
CEOS5-EXMiIMATION
~
8 BY MR. BUCHMANN:
9 Mr. Kudukis, yco made~ reference v.o a street Q
to lighting contract.
gg Just'so the panel understander what wo era ca2hing 12 about, presently I suppose the City of Clevs]e.ni
.U.lir :ula..ing 13 Company have a contract approved by crdinance for the g
Provision of street lighting energy to Elo City of Clovii. cud?
15 Roughly, and I am spee. king of rough numbers Of A
16 50,000 lights in the city, 25,000 ara served hv MIEY 97 light and 25,000-are' served by CEI.
18 The rates are established by ord:Luance.
If 19 there is' any change this would hcve to be approved.
20 0
The ordinances are for scacifica terms, tha 21 e ntracts, they are for a year er tiro. years g.,
22 and then they expire?
n-h
_h_IJ a lb 8)
_ [
g l
i-I am not rure about that.
9 p
I i
Q Directing your attention back to Daccabar 1972,
.i 25 I
-