ML19319D255
| ML19319D255 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 10/25/1968 |
| From: | Everts H, Snapp R FLORIDA POWER CORP. |
| To: | US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003130894 | |
| Download: ML19319D255 (4) | |
Text
, -..
,n.
UNITED OTATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
.A f.,
In the Matter of:
)
)
FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION
)
Docket No. 50-302 C/ 'T ~ ~P n d i'
)
/? -
(Crystal River Unit 3
)
Nuclear Generating Plant)
)
MOTION OF APPLICANT TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF INTERVENOR CAINESVILLE'S EXCEPTIONS TO PREHEARING ORDER AND INITIAL DECISION TO: THE UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Florida Power Corporation, Applicant in the above-styled matter, by and through its undersigned attorneys, files this Motion to strike Por-tions of Intervenor Gainesville's Exceptions to the Prehearing Order and Initial Decision, pursuant to Section 2.730(a) of the Commission's " Rules of Practice",10 CFR Part 2.
The Applicant respectfully moves the Commission to strike from Gainesville's Exceptions to the Prehearing Order and the Initial Decision the following language, including Appendix A, pages 4 and 5 of its Excep-tions:
"... As shown in Appendix A*, the Connecticut Yankee plant, even in its first six months of operation has proved to be competitive.with respect to other energy supplies purchased by the New England Power Company..
Nearly 200 milli os kilowatt-hours were provided at a cost of 6.87 mills, contrasted with energy supplied by Boston Edison and Consolidated Edison at unit costs of 8.33 mills and 8.03 mills per kilowatt-hour respec-tively. Of equal significance is the lower cost shown in comparison with the performance of the Yankee (Rowe)
Atomic, a predecessor in the history of demonstration units approved under 104(b) licenses.
"These demonstrable results are not lost on the
- Data a e from New England Power Company's Financial Statement and Opera-
, ting Report for Month and Period Ended June 30, 1968, page 5.5.
This was obtained in deposition proceedings held beginning August 13, 1968, Power Planning Committee v. New England Power Co., FPC E-7388.
8003130 N y O
e
t electric utility industry which is currently committed to 72,404,000 kw of nuclear capacity (100 units as of September 1968) or approximately 25% of the present installed capacity'of conventional units.
(AEC release, L-230, October 10, 1968)..... "
crounds
,1, The evidentiary hearing was concluded on July 17, 1968, and all parties, including Gainesville, stated that they had no more evidence to present (Transcript, Page 507). Cainesville's attempt to inject into the record of the present proceeding unsworn documents (Exhibit A and AEC Release L-230, October 10, 1968) pertaining to comparative electric gener-ating costs per kilowatt-hour in the New England area and the current volume of generation being committed to nuclear power amounts to a bald attempt to improperly reopen the evidentiary hearing and serves no useful purpose other than to delay, hinder and harass the Applicant.
2.
The above-quoted statements, together with Appendix A at-tached to its Exceptions and AEC Release, L-230, October 10, 1968, referred to by Gainesville, are immaterial and irrelevant to any issus properly be-fore the Board at the evidentiary hearing and would have been excluded had Gainesville attempted to inject such matter into the record at the public hearing..
3.
Gainesville had two full days (July 16 and 17,1968) while the hearing was in progress, to fully develop its case by offering any
- evidence it wished, subject to objection by other parties and a ruling by 'the Board.
Yet it announced it had nothing further to offer. Gaines-ville has had its day in Court and, now that this phase of the contest has
~ been concreded, it b' elatedly attempte to inject into the record matter
- which would have been irrelevant and immaterial if timely presented. The Applicant would be highly prejudiced by the admission into the record of.
f and other similar situations wherein large scale reactors have failed to demonstrate the practical value all concerned anticipated.
WHEREFORE, Applicant respectfully prays th' t this Honorable Com-a mission grant its Motion and strike from Intervenor's Exceptions the above-quoted statements and material.
Dated: ' October 25, 1968 Respectfully submitted, Of Counsel:
_/s/ Harry A. Evertz, III S. A. BRANDIMORE HARRY A. EVERTZ, III General Counsel Florida Power Building Florida Power Corporation 101 - 5th Street South Florida Power Building P. O. Box 14042 101 - 5th Street South St. Petersburg, Florida 33733 P. O. Box 14042 S t. Petersburg, Florida 33733 ROY B. SNAPP 1725 "K" Street N.W.
Washington, D. C. 20006 Counsel for Florida Power Corporation