ML19323J074
| ML19323J074 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak, South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 06/10/1980 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006170743 | |
| Download: ML19323J074 (59) | |
Text
I m
g-832 e
-t J
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
OU'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
x 3
Prehearing I'T In the Matter of:
Conference
'V 4
HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY (SOUTH TEXAS)
Docket Nos.
5
{
50-498A, 4997, TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY (COMANCHE PEAK) 50-445A, 4461 g
e
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _k 5
Commission Hearing Room k
~0 East-West Towers (Fifth Floor) j 4350 East-West Highway 9
_g.
dethesda, Maryland g
June 10,'1980 The above-entitled matter came on for prehearing conference, z=
pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m.
BEFORE:
ns I
() l MARSHALL E.
MILLER, CHAIRMAN SHELDON J.
'3OLFE l
14 MICHAEL L.
JLASER, ESQ.
{
15 APPEARANCES:
a:
d Ib On behalf of the NRC staff:
us FREDRIC D.
CHANANIA, ESQ.
{
MICHAEL B.
BLUME, ESQ.
.E On behalf of Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas:
$g FRED RITTS 20 WILLIAM H.
BURCHETTE, ESQ.
Northcutt and Ely 21 Watergate 600 Building Washington, D.C.
O) 22 i,.
On behalf of Central and Southwest Corporation:
23,
DAVID M.
STAHL, ESQ.
)
Isham, Lincoln.& Beale
^
1120 Connecticut Avenue, suite 325 5
Washington, D.C.
20036 8006170 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
r 833 On behalf of Department of Justice:
il
(~';
2
. SUSAN B.
CYPHERT, ESQ.
~'
Antitrust Division 3
. Department of Justice P.O.
Box 14141
[}-
4 Washington, D.C.
20444 e
5 On. behalf of Texas Utilities Generating Company:
A N
d 6
JOSEPH KNOTTS, ESQ.
I NICHOLAS S.
REYNOLDS, ESQ.
E 7
Debevoise and Liberman
{
1200 17th Street, N.W.
8 8-Washington, D.C.
20036 n
d d
9 MERLYN D.
SAMPELS, ESQ.
p Worsham, Forsythe & Sampels 10 2001 Bryan Tower 3
Suite 2500 5
11 Dallas, Texas 75201 d
12 On behalf of Houston Lighting and Power Company:
3e f-d 13 DOUGLAS GREEN, ESQ.
't) 3 J.A.
BOUKNIGHT, JR.,
ESQ.
E 14 Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad and Toll y
1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
2 15 Washington, D.C.
20036 Y
j 16 On behalf of the City of San Antonio.
n d
17 ;
JON C.
WOOD, ESQ.
y Matthews, Nowlin, Macfarlane and Barrett 18 1500 Alamo National Building g
San Antonio, Texas 78205 E
19 R
On behalf of the City of Brownsville:
20 GEORGE SPIEGEL, ESQ.
21 Spiegel and McDiarmid 22 W
hi ton D.
2003 v.J '
'23
- On behalf of the City of Austin:
i 24.
RICHARD C.
BALOUGH, ESQ.
(s) ---
P.O.
Box 1088 25 Austin, Texas 78767 l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
833-A j
On behalf of Houston Lighting and Power Company:
h 2
STEVE HUNSICKER, ESO.
J. MICHAEL BALDWIN, ESQ.
I 3
J._ GREGORY COPELAND, ESQ.
Baker & Botts O
- 4 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 e
5 On behalf-of Central and Southwest Corporation:
A 6
[
MICHAEL I. MILLER, ESQ.
R 7
Isham, Lincoln'and Beale
~
One First National Plaza gj' 8
Chicago, Illinois 60603 dd 9
io B
10 E
g 11 is J
12 iS '
O!r i
E 14 i
w
_2 -15 s
- g -16 m
!i. 17
$i 18
=
5 19 i
.k 20 21
- o 22 23 24 t
25 !
i I
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
7 834 j
P3QQ{EQlNGS (10:00 a.m.)
r')
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
These are the proceedings in NRC
(/
2 Docket Numbers 50-498A, 499A, and 50-445A and 446A, involving
(~}
the matters known as the South Texas Project and the Comanche Ks e
5 Peak proceeding which has been consolidated for disposition of 5
g discovery and such proceedings as may be indicated.
e 7
This prehearing conference is being held on the day 8
""U""
" 9
U
' ""~
ing settlement negotiations which all parties and counsel have 9
i 10 filed as of yesterday.
i E
q 11 We will ask for the benefit of our record and reporter if unsel will identify themselves, their associates and parties 2
Z f r the record, please.
13 bE We will start over here at this table.
3 4
UP E
MR. CHANANIA:
My name is Fred Chanania.
I represent t
15 w
~
]s.
~the NRC-staff.
With me this morning at counsel's table is l
g Michael Blume, also of the NRC staff.
b.
17 x
18 MR. WOOD:
My name is Jon Wood.
I represent the city
=
of San Antonio.
j9 95 MR. BALOUGH:
Good morning.
Richard Balough represent-20 ing the city of Austin.
21 MS. CYPHERT:
Good morning.
Susan Braden Cyphert.
I 22
)
2 l
represent the Department of Justice.
i MR. SAMPELS:
I am M.D.
Sampels representing Texas 24
(~)
Utilities.
With me is Joe Knotts and-Robert Woolridge.
l 5!
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1
l 835 MR. COPELAND:
Greg Copeland for Houston Light and
.f)
Power Company.
With me this morning is Lon Bauknight and Doug Gre 2
en v
f L wenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad and Toll in Washington, and 3
o Steve Hunsicker and Mike Baldwin of Baker & Botts.
Q) 4 e
5 MR. MILLER:
Good morning.
My name is Michael Miller E
representing the Central and Southwest and its subsidiary operatin 6
g 7
companies.
With me is David Stahl of our firm.
j MR. acaN:
I.m Douglas F. John representing South
{d Texas Electric Cooperative and Medina Electric Cooperative.
9 i
10 MR. BURCHETTE:
Good morning.
I'm William H.
Burchette
- z jj representing Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas.
With me is D
d 12 Mr. Fred Ritts.
Z Cib CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Anyone else', counsel, parties, who 13
'u) $
l j4 hasn't made his Appearance for the record?
sii 2
15 We are pleased with the status reports which we have d'
received.
16 You have done a good deal of work and effort, a good
- <5 g.
j7 deal of success on the part of counsel and parties which we d
is C ***"d-E j9 For the record perhaps it would be well to have you 2M 20 summarize, at any rate, the status of these matters as they appear t
21 y u and to your colleagues.
First of all, I suppose as a 22 9rouP it might be good if you took the utilities comprising the v
2], applicants or licensees in the two proceedings, and then we will 24 get int (m.
intervenors and winding up perhaps with staff and the
)
25 l Department of Justice who have varying points of view.
i 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
836 Who wishes to go first?
/^N I
(Laughter.)
bl 2
We understand something was signed in Chicago yesterday.
3
(-'u}
We have copies this morning.
4 MR. SAMPELS:
I am the oldest.
g 5
(Laughter.)
9 3
'6 e
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Also the prettiest.
E
- j (Laughter.)
e.9 8
M MR. SAMPELS:
The same thing, of course, my colleague d
}"
on my right.
9' o
P 10 j
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
The same thing, of course, always of
=
5 II your colleague on your right.
k d
12 g
(Laughter.)
13
}
MR. SAMPELS:
Mr. Chairman, as indicated in the status E
14 w
reports, the system, the Central-Southwest Corporation and Houston bI Lighting and Power did reach an agreement which was executed in x
16 i
Chicago yesterday, which is designed to form the basis for a e
complete settlement of the so-called interconnection controversy, e*
of' course subject to any conditions that must be approved by this
=
19 8
Board.
'If'the settlement is implemented it will not only resolve n
20 the issues in the Comanche Peak and South Texas licensing proceed-21 ing, but also issues that exist in numerous forms, from New Orleans, 7
\\_/
22 I guess, on the south, to Washington on the north.
23 !
I think that controversy, if implemented, would do much
/~~N i
's' '!
24 more than. settle litigation.
It would result in the construction 25 -l of interregional ties between the Southwest power pool and ERCOT.
. h-ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYo INC.
837 And to the extent that there are benefits to be derived from j
[')
interconnection -- and certainly parties in this proceeding and v
2 thers feel very strongly that there are -- those benefits will 3
Q become available to the public at a much earlier date than could 4
e 5
therwise be possible if this and other proceedings were fully R
litigated.
8 6
e We think that forms an important part of the settlement 7
8 eff rts that the parties have indicated in the last six days.
N Furthermore, as reported to the Board, I think, in the first 9
- i 10 status report, we believe that we have reached an understanding eZ j
jj with the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission which if c
is 6
12 approved by this Board would also solve one of the significant i5
()S) r areas of dispute that has existed; and that is, the conduct of 13 g
E 14 the Texas utility company system and Houston Lighting and Power h
15 with respect to proposed interconnections that may be made by
- a g
Central Southwest Corporation in the near future, or any inter-is
- ,5 j7 connections which may be proposed or desired by other parties in
- a b
18 l the future.
{
j9 We think that was a major accomplishment, and we believe 20 that when other issues that exist between the parties are settled, 21 if they can be settled, and a proposed settlement submitted to 72 this Board, it will also find that a good and solid basis exists V
23l f r settlement, and one which we believe this Board will be able e
approve when submitted to it.
^
24 t
)
v 25 ;
Obvi usly we cannot now submit a proposed settlement to i
t f
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
f 838 the Board because all issues have not been resolved, the most recent j
(~)
2 ne being that the system has had with parties to this proceeding.
s_-
3 Yesterday we spent a good part of the day with staff of the NRC I
7"]
4 trying to address other issues which have not yet been resolved.
x/
e 5
We have received a suggested form of license conditions 4
6 for the project, which if approved by this Board will form a e
i 7
complete basis for settlement of the controversy with the staff.
g think there is substantial agreement with respect to all of the I
N proposed license conditions other than what I will call a few.
9 i
10 - Whether that is two issues or three issues I think it is not oz 1
l jj !
particularly important to give a number to them now, but while we n
,j j2 still have important differences with the staff, I think even 3
yesterday we made substantial progress.
And I think giver addi-13 IE E
14 tional time and a good faith effort on our part and on the staff's i
6 that those issues can be resolved.
15 T
16 One thing we have not been able to accomplish simply
.sW j7 because of a lack of adequate time in the past thirty days is b
18 further significant discussions with the Department of Justice.
j9 A lack of_those discussions with the Department, there is no x5 20 indication on our part we cannot reach a settlement.
It has gj simply been the limited amount of timo available and the efforts 22 that have been made.
And the staff with the Central-Southwest O
(~/
23,
system has not permitted us to readdress the a veral issues that 24
. exist within ourselves and the Department.
!,2
('
25 j However, as indicated, as late as this morning when I i
4 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
839 g
talked briefly to Bob Fabricant that they certainly are willing
-({};
to continue discussions and to address all issues that exist 2
between us in this proceeding.
3 Q
4 We believe that if further time is allowed by this Board v
e 5
that significant additional progress can be made, and hopefully U
d 6l mplete disposition of the issues that exist between ourselves e
7 and the Department can be made.
S 8
The issues there again are also difficult, but I think n
N with a good faith approach by all parties involved, we will be 9
z' 10 able to bring to this Board further~ reports noting either a oz j
33 complete or certainly materially partial settlement of the
<k issues.
d 12 Z.
p] i 13 Thank you.
Q g_ j4 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Let me inquire, what recommendations-U 15 do you make to the Board as to the time of any stay or setting
- x 16 f any dates for subsequent reports or developments?
Also, to B
M d
17 indicate to us if you could without going into the substance of w
b 18 anything the nature of whatever issues there are that you will
=
{
j9 be approaching and you intend to resolve, in addition to those n'
20 y u've already told us the status of.
21 MR. SAMPELS:
The recommendation that Texas Utility 22 Company system makes to the Board is that we have a further
^
v 23 l extension of proceedings for thirty days to permit the parties i
.r s L24 to have further discussions, hopefully resulting within that
'\\ )
25 ; = thirty day period with a complete resolution, or if not a complete I
l I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
840 resolution, certainly a partial resolution which will permit the O
issues from this Board to be narrowed in a pretrial proceeding.
U 2
I 3
ann t make a firmer statement that thirty days will result in a complete settlement, but I think that measuring the j
4 e
5 pr gress of the past, a significant progress and hopefully a 9
8 6
complete progress will be made.in that period.
e 7
_The issues that seem to be separating ourselves between 8
urselves and the staff of the NRC at the moment, Mr. Chairman, N
primarily deal with the utilization of the proposed interconnectio 9
ns
- s 10 between ERCOT and the Southwest Conference.
Obviously, an ez j
jj interconnection is of relatively little value unless people can
[i-12 get t the interconnection and get across the interconnection.
~'
Z O h 13 S
the staff has raised that as an issue in its behalf, and V
E 14 dealing primarily with the economics of movement of power to and w
2 15 fr m and over the interconnection, one of the major things that 5
16 we believe we have accomplished in the settlement agreement with B
us g
j7 Central-Southwest system is to agree on a set of principles that.
w b
18 would be applicable for the movement of power to and from'and 5
t 19 over the interconnections.
?,
20 This set of principles we believe conforms to existing 23 law as developed by the FERC.
We do not suggest that is -- we 22
-are not submitting that to this Board at this time, but we do 23,
believe that based upon our research that we have found'an l
n 24 important set of principles that should provide the basis for U
25l access to the D.C.
ties by anyone who wishes to use them at rates ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
841 3
to be' imposed by the regulatory commissions having jurisdictions c( j) over those rates.
2
~
3 The question, I suppose, exists between ourselves and
()
the staff as to whether that set of principles is something that 4
e 5
they are or will become satisfied with and in terms of proposed 3
6 licensing conditions in this proceeding.
l 7
I really can't do much more than identify that as an E
8 area that we are talking, and we have not yet reached an agreement n
N with respect to that.
9 i
h 10 The other kinds of things I think are really details z
jg that are simply requiring time for engineers to understand -- both
's 6
12 the engineers within our company and the engineers within the
?.
\\n)S j r'
staff of the various commissions.
For example, the staff ba'ieves 13 ou-E 14 and the staff of the FERC believes also, that if a person is N
15 wheeling firm power to and from over the connections and the conne :-
J 16 tion becomes disabled because of some catastrophe, lightning, or g
17,
is put out of service, or is in for maintenance or something, w
b 18 the person who is moving power over the connection should have
=
5 access to backup power within the state of Texas.
j9 8n 20 We think that we have proposed a method of providing 23 backup power to such persons to the staff of the FERC and have
~
22 identified that proposal also to the staff of the NRC which is --
x_/
23 which will give a person wheeling firm power complete protection
,_\\
24-in the event that the line is out of service.
L' 25 i Also, the other area is whether or not the parties will i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
842 permit others in the future to have access to an ownership posi-f,)
tion in the proposed D.C.
tie itself.
Again, a part of the settle-2 m
ment agreement between CSW and TU provides an excellent mechanism 3
h for people to become owners of the D.C.
facility today, or if 4
a e
5 they do not elect to become owners of the D.C.
facility today, E
6 -
to have the ability to purchase part of the capacity of that line f7 in the future under certain conditions which are outlined in the 8
settlement agreement between Houston and CSW.
9 The balance of the issues with the staff are some of 10 the normal things you might expect to come up in a licensing 5
E effort of a plant.
Some of them are simple, and frankly, I think p
11 3
d 12 we have reached an agreement on most kinds of conditions that 3
13 Y u n rmally expect to see for a nuclear generating plant.
O'3 $
E 14 S me, at least one or two of these issues, are difficult.
5!
15 One revolves around our relative duty, they say, of Texas Utilities
- z T
16 make sales of power wholesale without limitation.
We at t
B m
i g
37 Texas Utilities have indicated to the staff that we cannot under-w b
18 take to build generation for the world, and to the extent that
~r-E 39 we have generation available, we have certainly indicated our an 20 willingness to enter into agreements, which we have done in the 21 past, which relate to sales, wholesale.
22 But in order to impose upon us the obligation of an
(.)
23.; absolute duty to sell power that we might not have or to build
- 2( I generation that we cannot afford is an issue between us.
And.I
( )
25, think really those are the principal questions that remain
- ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
843 unresolved in the discussions between ourselves and the staff.
g f~J)'
The issues that remain unresolved with the Department 2
fJusticesurrbundthequestionofourconduct in connection 3
(~)-
with~ proposals for interconnections between ERCOT and the Southwes t v
4 e,
5 Pool in the future.
N 8
6 I have indicated that we have reached an agreement with e
7 the staff with respect to that issue.
We have submitted that 8
issue to the Department of Justice, and we have had many, many N
discussions with the Department with respect to a prevision 9
- z h
10 g verning ur conduct with respect to the proposed future inter-z j
jj connections; and we have not yet resolved that with the Department of Justice.
I think we have gone a long way, but we have not d
12 Z
yet resolved it; and I'm not ready to say today that that particu-('/ j 13
)
E 14 lar issue will be resolved by the Department.
But hopefully, if u
2 15 that is resolved, the remaining issues with respect to license T
16 commissions for Comanche Peak are resolvable.
I do not know 3M j7 currently of any fundamental problem that may exist with respect b
18 to other issues; but as I said earlier, we haven't had time to
_f j9 really flesh out our discussions with the remaining license N
20 conditions to the extent we have with the staff.
21 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
That has been very 22-helpful.
Thank you.
The Board appreciates your explanations.
('s) v 23 Yes.
f-24 MR. COPELAND:
Mr. Chairman, I will make my comments
\\ }
brief.
25 f I would-just like to emphasize to the Board that we have 1
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
844 been_ involved in the very long, bloody and difficult battle in g
Q this case for over four years now.
Myself and other lawyers in 2
v this room have done nothing else for the last three months but 3
p~
4 try'to reach principles upon which we can settle this controversy.
v.
e 5
We think it is in the interest of our clients and in N
d 6
the interest of all the agencies here in Washington, the courts e
7 and everybody, to bring this matter to a close.
h I was in a conference room yesterday with the presidents 8
M 9
f all the companies who were involved in signing this agreement, i
h 10 and when they signed this agreement, I can assure they believe z
. );
they have laid aside their differences, and they are ready to s
d 12 move on with getting these interconnections constructed and going
[
13 about the business of generating and selling electricity.
.5 14 They have lots of other problems on their minds besides d
k 15 this case, and they want to put it aside.
They have worked very y
J 16 hard among themselves to settle this case.
s
'J$
I think that we are practically at the door of finally g
37 W
18 resolving this once and for all.
I think the Board has shown
=
{
j9 great wisdom.in putting off the trial on this matter to allow 20 us the time to work on settling this controversy.
gj It's obvious from the reports that you have received 22 on the last two occasions that the parties have worked diligently 23 ;
to do something to settle this case and have done so quite fre-24 quently..
g 4
I think that the Board for that reason should look 25-l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i 845 I
q favorably upon the requests for further extension of time in this
/
proceeding. ' Houston is in a little bit of a dilemma in that
(.)V 2
respect.
We frankly just punted yesterday in filing our status 3
(~]
4 report on the question of how much time we should request.
\\s e
5 think it is only fair to say that to some extent I I
8 6
agree with the staff's position.
I think a longer period of e
7 time may prove more fruitful this time than just a thirty day extension.
g N
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
What do you recommend to the. Board?
9 i
MR. COPELAND:
The other side of the coin, Mr. Miller, g.
z g
jj is that TU has a case that is on a much faster track than ours, and I
,5 12 really think at this point it is somewhat unfair for Houston Z
13 to'suggest the length of time that ought to occur.
I think TU
(]
is the one that is under much more pressure to get their plant E
14
- a licensed.
2 15 g
I would defer to Mr. Sampels on that question.
Those E
cA 37 are really all the comments I have.
b 18 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you, Mr. Copeland.
E MR. GLASER:
Do you think Houston Lighting and Power j9 X
20 w uld accede to Mr. Sampels' recommendation of thirty days?
MR. COPELAND:
Yes, sir, definitely and perhaps 21 frankly, I think it will help the settlement to let the matter 22
!'~') -
23 g
f rward at the FERC who are going to call a settlement r;nnference i
f-24 at that_ point, which should receive comments from all of you i"si 25 electric: utilities in the Southwest power pool that are interested ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
846 in this proceeding.
j
(~)
As you know, I've emphasized many times that there are 2
s-3 a number of other parties who have interest in this overall liti-('h-4 l gation.that aren't necessarily represented here today.
I think q,
5 that having received comments from them, I frankly think we will U
6 get very strong support for the settlement from the totality of e
7 the industry.
]
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
What is your timing of such proceeding s
N with FERC?
9 i
h ~ 10 MR. COPELAND:
That is the problem, sir.
We do not have z
j jj, a specific date set yet, but I would think within sixty days
<c 4
12 we w uld be in and out of the settlement conference.
?.
(v~) $ 13 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Mr. Miller.
g MR. MILLER:
Thank you.
E 14 U
k 15 I w uld just like to underscore what 3br. Sampels and
_Mr.
Copeland have already told the Board.
The settlement agree-3.
16 W
g j7 ment-that was executed yesterday represents in the judgment of our w
b 18 clients a very significant milestone and resolution of our differ-
=
ences with TU and Houston which have encompassed many forums in j9 9.
5 addition to the NRC.
20 21 It does in fact provide a framework for resolution of 7.
22 these very complex issues -- not just complex in themselves in e
a
%)
23 j terms of dealing with the individual parties, but those which
_ affect the interests not only of this agency but of many other em.
24
(_.)
25
_ state and federal agencies and other electric utilities which have ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
m
847 an interest in the outcome of this matter.
(~}
As Mr. Sampels pointed out, the settlement still require s
s-3 further discussion with the interested governmental agencies with (s) 4 respect to such matters as wheeling, emergency backup, and perhaps s
e 5
ther matters as well, such as those dealing with the right of 3
}
a ess, if you will, by way of purchase to the D.C.
interconnectio n 6
e m
E in the future.
l.
8 I think that we, as we say, regard this as a significant n
j milestone.
It has taken most of the energy and attention of the 9
i h
10 knowledgeable people in our office and the executives in our z
5 companies.
For that reason we are unable to make substantial p.11 m
d 12 Progress in connection with our differences with the Public Utilit:r Z_
3 Board of Brownsville.
7s 13 U -@
E 14 Mr. Spiegel, representing the Board, has been in contact w
15 with members of our firm, myself included.
We have begun the 3,
16 negotiating process.
I am hopeful that we can now turn our W
d 17 attention to the city of Brownsville and attempt to resolve our l
differences there as well.
18 0
I wculd hope that that process could begin soon.
- However, 39 8n 20 should say that the overall settlement has been agreed to, which I
21 we will be working hard to implement.
It is going to kind of 22 set the framework for resolution of our differences with Brownsville
)
as well.
23 24 j It is for that reason really that we have ordered the r~c
. ( )4 i
i settlement efforts as we have.
And I have referred to our 25 ;
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
848
~ resolutions with Houston and TU, and now to deal with Brownsville.
j (o) 2 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
3 Any other questions?
4 Thank you.
e 5
I think I may not have asked you and I don't see it A
6 in y ur status reports.
What time does your client suggest, o
Mr. Miller?
7 MR. MILLER:
We take no position on this other than 8
N to duly advise the Board that there is a process in motion at 9
i 10 FERC that is going to take the attention of all the principles, cz h11 except perhaps the NRC staff and the Department of Justice.
That D
d 12 Process really gets into motion this Friday when the prehearing N
2 13 conference is scheduled at FERC.
O)3
'u
.E 14 I'm not quite certain myself of the timing of the steps w
2 15 that are set out in the settlement agreement.
But I guess I agree 5
T 16 with Mr. Copeland that approximately a sixty day period is t
us g
37 reasonable to determine how both the FERC staff and the other a
b 18 P.arties to th'e FERC proceeding, not all of whom are present in
=
{
j9 this proceeding, are going to. react to the settlement proposal, n
20 I.w uld say that within that timeframe we will know 23
.whether the government is in fact moving ahead on an expeditious
.A 22 basis, or if we run into some snag, which I must say we dc not V
23 j anticipate at this time.
- 24 MR. GLASER:
What purpose would you serve by this Board
. 25 l holding a prehearing conference thirty days hence if it is going ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
849 to take sixty days at least to accomplish a settlement with FERC?
}
MR. MILLER:
It may very well be that you would then 2
3 have the~ opportunity to inquire more closely of all the partici-(]
pants as to where we stand in the settlement process.
I think 4
v that within thirty days there will have been significant movement E
at FERC.
On the other hand, it probably will take sixty days 6
7 that I' mentioned, that Mr. Copeland referred to, before we know l
fr ertain whether the settlement is going to proceed up the 8
sij ladder.there.
9 igg CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Well, Mr. Sampels has pointed out, g
jj and I think other counsel have recognized, that they probably are
,J 12 m st sensitive to the time factors and perhaps have the most at
?.
d,rs @
risk here in seeing that they move most expeditiously.
13 I think ou E
14 all counsel concur in that point of view.
Gal MR. MILLER:
Yes, sir.
15 D].g CHAIRMAN MILLER:
At the very end we'll get back to M
j7 you, Mr. Sampels, and see what consensus has developed.
18 All right.
Let's see who has not reported among the
=
. private utilities engaged in negotiations.
j9 3
20 Who wishes to go next?
How about Brownsville, the
' city of Brownsville?
g MR. SPIEGEL:
My name is George Spiegel.
I entered 22 L) mY appearance today for the city of Brownsville.
23 i 24 We have had one discussion about a month and a half
)
ag with Mr. Miller, and my understanding is -- perhaps we should 25 i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
850
. clarify that on the record -- Mr. Miller is speaking for Central 1
73 and Southwest and has authority to negotiate for all of the
(_J-2 subsidiaries, including Central Power and Light.
I believe that 3
is the basis of our operating, and I am not sure all of the k_)
4 officials of Central Power and Light recognize this.
I hope e
5 h
they should.
3 6
g We have had forthright discussions, and at this point 8
7 g
we are waiting to hear from them.
I understand that Mr. Miller j
8 d
has been busy these last few weeks, so we have not seen this d
9 W
agreement yet, and we don't know what our position is.
h 10 y
Certainly there is all the evidence that these people
'j 11 are very serious about settlement, so we will go along with s
g 12 5
whatever time the Board in its wisdom decides.
However, we do (1) !
'3 u
think that there are some substantial issues; we don't know for E
14 Wg sure, but that there may eventually have to be hea.ings.
2 15 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you, Mr. Spiegel.
16 j
W I suppose the record can show that you and the Bcard d
17 s
have now been served this morning with a copy of this agreement 5
18
- g which was signed, I believe, in Chicago yesterday.
Is that 19 N
correct?
20 MR. SPIEGEL:
Thank you, sir.
21.
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
(m
.22
\\-
Let's see.
Who else wishes to go next?
23,
l MR. BURCHETTE:
My name is William Burchette, appearing 7"i 24l (J
for Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas.
25 l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1:MX We have executed a letter of intent with Texas Utilities,
('];
particularly Texas Light and Utilities, and as indicated in our u_
status report, we are moving forward to execute agreements which 3
are necessary to satisfy our participation in Comanche Peak.
p 4
Q1 I w uld e
5 ust make one comment with respect to the h
extension of time, to say that we now as potential co-owners in 3
6 this Comanche Peak project would like to move forward just as 7
Texas' Utilities would; so we would support the thirty day extension F.j requested by Texas Utilities.
9 eo That is all I have, sir.
g 10 z
E CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
p 11 I
12 Suppose we have not yet heard from South Texas 3
Electric Cooperative, Inc., and is that Medina, M-e-d-i-n-a, g
Ud Electric Cooperative, Inc.
g g
5 g
33 MR. JOHN:
I would like to begin by hoping to be w
served with a copy of that settlement agreement.
M CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Very well.
It will be served right 7
w!
18 n w.
We have a very expeditious service.
Let the record show
=
you have now been served.
j9 95 (Laughter.)
g MR. JOHN:
With that in mind, I drafted my statement 21 22 f r the status report unaware that the statement had been signed.
23 l expressed certain concern about'not being party to a settlement
.I 24 until af ter it has been agreed to by the major parties and is being circulated for approval.
That having occurred, I'm hopeful 25 ;
l i
i 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
852 now that th'e provisions of the settlement would treat most of g
ur n erns.
2 3
I am gratified to hear from Mr. Sampels that at least
)
4 part of the settlement does go to the question of interconnections a
e 5
in the future and what the effect would be on ERCOT, and that E
6 the parties, other than one of the parties to this proceeding and perhaps one of the owners of the D.C. interconnection that 7
j 8
is being contemplated is the party to execute that interconnection j
So what I would recommend again is perhaps an extension 9
~i h
10 f time to give my clients and other clients to the proceedings z
j jj who have really not~oeen favored with copies of this to look at
<D 12 it and decide whether or not it adequately treats their needs.
c p$
I assume that the proponents of the settlement will be d 3 13 E
14 hoping to inform me by communication bilaterally or within a 5
h 15 gr up urselves and other intervenors to the proceeding in an M
g effort to resolve any differences we might have once we have
?]
g j7 had a chance to look this over.
w b
18 In that vein I will certainly have no problem with a O
thirty day extension or even perhaps a longer extension if the j9 an Board feels it is warranted.
20 gj
-CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
I believe that your report, 22 which was dated June 9, 1980, and received promptly, indicated i 1 i'~'
23 basically that you would like to negotiate, that you had a few 24 phone conferences or contacts, but you haven' t really been invited
( \\
25 to participate face-to-face and you haven't been favored with ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
853 y
copies of much of anything, and you would like to become a party.
b)
Is that about it?
2 MR. JOHN:
I have an invitation here.
3
(] '
(Laughter. )
4 5
MR. JOHN:
I have to say we have felt there were docu-b 6
ments being circulated that we had not seen.
I don't mean to 1
7 indicate that we expect to be able to walk into the dance and 8
have someone invite us to dance every time.
I do feel as parties t
the case that we are one of select few.
There are perhaps ten 9
i h
10-parties in the proceeding, and we do have a position to state and z
jj would like to be involved in negotiations to the extent that is t) d 12 p ssible.
3
/~'; $
I understand given the complexities of the case and 13
'uJ g l
14 the history of dealings between the major three parties here I
l 2
15 it certainly is unde standable that they would want to resolve i
5 l
?
16 their differences between themselves and among themselves as the D
rA g
j7 first order of business.
But again, I certainly don't want there 18 to be any burden upon us to have to try to undo a provision of E
j9
. settlement that has been agreed to by the big three, if you will, R
l-20 simply because we weren't privy in the first round.
2)
I feel that we as a party should have every opportunity
.q 22 to make our position known, again not.on the outside looking in G
23 and'trying to upset something that has been worked out.
24' I should close by,saying I have every reason to believe I25 the settlement is going to be acceptable.
I know of nothing to
- ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i 854 indicate that it won't be.
We will do our best to live with
([]
whatever is in the interest of this generally and all the parties 2
to the proceeding.
3 O
c"^'a"^" "za:
Tr=x v "-
4 MR. COPELAND:
Mr. Chairman, might I just comment in e
5 U
.A 6
resp nse to that?
I'll be very brief.
e
' CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Yes.
7 MR. COPELAND:
I want Mr. John to understand that the 8
N door is definitely not closed to his client, and I.think that 9
i h
10 it is important to emphasize that this thing is going to get a z!
11 full airing in the form of a settlement conference involving all I
d 12 of the utilities; and certainly all of their comments will be z
(3 h teken into consideration in the context of this settlement and 13
() 3 14 n t limiting our discussions by any agreements in that conference.
- a 15 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
5 16 I believe we're down now, are we not, to the staff and is us g
j7 the Department of Justice.
Is there anyone whom I may have over-18 ked inadvertently or who would like to appear before that?
1 E.19 Well, we will give the staff your choice.
Some times R
20 we jumped on you earlier in the game.
We're not going to jump on gj you at all, but we're going to give you a choice between your 22 position and the Department of Justice.
Which do you choose?
p)
L MR. CHANANIA:
Perhaps because we have been more involved 23{
S 24 in the settlement effort in the last month than the Department of
]
25 i Justice, it is appropriate for us'to speak now.
.f ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
855 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Fine.
/ i MR. CHANANIA:
I did want to make one correction to our V
2 status report given the last minute nature of things these days.
(^)
We indicate in that report that we received a copy of the settleme at 4
v Proposai yesterday.
Indeed, we didn't, although Mr. Copeland e
5 h
made a-gracious offer last night to bring one to my home.
I 7
really couldn't see any purpose at that point knowing that we'd I
get one this morning.
8 h
9 As with some of the other parties, we have also been 9
i g
served this morning.
We were in our discussions with Mr. Sampels z
j jj yesterday able to talk about and see portions of the agreement,
<D but as you know, it was signed apparently at 2:00 yesterday in d
12 F.
fq @3 Chicago.
It was difficult to be availed of an opportunity to 13-v see the entire thing before, if you will, it was actually official g
g w
15 Also, we made an attempt to serve by messenger parties w
16 yesteroay with the staff's status report.
It has been mailed to y
37 everyone on the service list, but if anyone wants one, they are a
b 18 ertainly welcome to one.
I have extra copies today.
E As far as the staff's. efforts over the last month have j9 R
been concerned, it has really been, if you will, a bifurcated 20 eff rt.
21 On the one hand we had a set of license conditions 22 already existing with the Texas Utilities Company, and that seemed v
23-to provide _a basis that we could have discussions with them about 24 possible changes that might be necessary as far as the staff im, =
1 d
25 I was concerned, at least on certain issues.
I
-ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
x
856 j
Naturally, the D.C. interconnection and all those associ Q,
ated issues such as getting to and from the interconnection, the 2
3 emergency backup, ownership rights, those are issues which of O
e urse were n t addressed in the old set of license conditions, 4
e 5
and indeed we have suggested some of our views on before this.
b d
6 But now we'll be presenting our views in a much more concise e
fashion, I imagine, with the settlement proposal now in hand 7
8 and g'iven an opportunity to analyze it.
N In that regard we are in a sense waiting this month to 9
i h
10 hear some things.
I think it is evident from the report from the z
j jj other parties that they have been working extremely hard and
<D d
12 indeed have kept the staff informed that they were doing so, 3
p$
13 but just simply could not arrive at an agreement that we could v3 4
E.
14 see or at least arrive at a point where we could receive a communi -
2 15 cation about the substance of it.
So we moved in areas where we ould.
16 s
u$
g-j7 Now, as Mr. Sampels indicated, we have made substantial 18 progress in seeing eye to eye on a number of issues.
There are h
39 some, as he has outlined, that are important and which remain in 9M 20 discussion.
I don't think that there is anything that I perceive gj right now as unresolvable.
Certainly, the wheeling provisions p
22 are extremely complex.
I think they may be the toughest of all to V
23 vercome.
p 24
.But as I sit here or stand here today, I don't see U
)
25 l anything that can't be worked out, at least on the basis of looking fl I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
857 j
the movement that has occurred already, and trying to say if at Il that kind of spiri and that kind of flexibility still exists.
v 2
3 Then we can certainly say that settlement on all issues remains
( ')
4 least the most worthwhile path to take or to pursue at this at v
time.
g is 6
I read Mr. John's status report yesterday, and it did 7
bring home a point to the staff that we feel sensitive about that, h
if y u will, given the lack of time to have a concrete proposal 8
M N
from CSW, HL&P, and TU so that we could actually have a position 9
z' 10 n some of thoset areas that they have covered.
e 25 jj We naturally couldn't consult with other people in 12 the case as to what their views were.
On some of the issues that C$
we have been discussing unilaterally with TU, it seems that the 1
13 L/ j E
14 discussions were yesterday in part.
w 15 We have presented a proposal to them and formed the j
basis of those discussions, and we certainly intend to consult g
it us g
j7 other parties as to the staff's view, which is contained in those.
w b
18 I suppose the final thing which I would like to mention O
is that while we have had a set of license conditions with j9 R
20 Texas Utilities Company upon which to launch discussions, we gj really don't have any of the other major parties to the settlement O
-22 proposal today, namely HL&P and CSW.
v 23,
To the extent that those are necessary, certainly for i
24 1 some of the newer subj ects, if you will, surrounding the D.C.
p 25 ; interconnection, that is going to just take time to work on.
We ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
858
)
y have a basis that they have provided this morning to start looking
('
at that, and certainly this is not a first blush effort.
We have v-2 made 3
ur views known, and now we have something back.
We can
("')
begin, as I said, to be more concise and directed.
4 v
n 5
I guess that leads me to the sixty to ninety days.
We k
8 6
suggested that.
Natural).y we, of course, are willing to accede e
7 to the consensus in the room.
In that regard I will say that 8
as far as the Comanche Peak settlement, as late as February 1982 9
as far as the staff is concerned, which is a three month extension
- z h
10 from the prior staff estimate of November '81.
E jj Now, as you know, there are different estimates, some U
g j2 held by_the staff and some held by the licensees', as to when that 3
(-) $
perational date will occur.
But at least as of yesterday that 13
\\-) 8 E
14 was the most current view of the staff.
W 2
15 In light of that ninety day shift in the operational U
J 16 date and in light of the tasks which remain, certainly for the aw g
j7 parties and the staff, namely starting the proce,edings at FERC w
b 18 necessary to accomplish some of the central portions of this
=
{
settlement, talking with the parties and drafting license condi-N 19 l 20 l tiens and reaching a final agreement, if possible, with some of 2) the parties in the room, it just seems as though thirty days is g-22 going to be a pretty short time to do that.
L.)
23l I understand, and we don't wish to cause any delay in 24 the licensing of the plant'if at all avoidable, so it is with
'(sr
\\s 25
'some' hesitation that I suggest sixty to ninety days; but
~
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
859 nevertheless, I felt compelled to give you what I thought was j
rN a time period which would be the most comfortable.
(,)
2 3
Now, we will accomplish, of course, if this date is
(~xv) 4 thirty days, we will accomplish what we can in that thirty days.
e 5
It may be that the Board will wish some kind of interim check
$j-6 if they were to grant a sixty to ninety day period,~just to make e
7 sure that people were moving along and had not all of a sudden E
g ne on their summer vacations for the first thirty days of that 8
M 9
sixty to ninety day period.
i h
10 Id think that in light of all the areas which do z!
11 remain outstanding among the parties that the sixty to a hundred d
12 days was at least our best estimate as to where we could could Z
13 in and say we have settled on all the things we can settle on.
(('T/O E
14 It may be everything, it may be nine-tenths, it may be half --
U 15 I can't say at this point.
But we have reached the end of the
"=
16 settlement track, and we can go from there as to wherever.
If
.DA g
37 there is a proceeding left, we can talk about that at that time.
w h
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Any questions?
=
All right.
Thank you.
19 RR 20 Ms. Cyphert, I guess on behalf of the Department of 21 Justice we'll hear from you.
22 MS. CYPHERT:
Yes, sir.
I think that the Department's k_)
23,
status report reflects the work that the Department did this 24 month exploring settlement.
It was very little, not because the
[_s) 25. j Department is not interested in trying to reach a settlement in
.i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
860 this case'but b'ecause of the fact that we felt that one substantial y
(~,
issue of-this case.had the're been no movement on which would 3
v satisfy the public interest, and for that reason --
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
What was that?
f's, 4
U e-5 IIave y u identified that?
.{
HERn Yes, we have identified that.
They are h
6 at issue, Your Honor.
And because there was no movement on that 7
f8 issue which we felt would satisfy the public interest, we have N
.9 spent most of our time preparing for trial in this matter.
- ri h
10 I w uld point out to the Board something which I know z
j jj that you are sensitive about at other staff conferences; that is, d
12 the difference between public and private interests.
The private
?
O. 3 13 interests in this~ case appear to be satisfied.
Yet, I would point s
E 14 ut that the public interest, at least in the Department's lal 15 pini n, has not yet been satisfied.
f.
16 Mr. Fabricant has asked me to clarify --
D A
_37 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
trdon me.
I've looked through your
-l 18 statement,.and I don't seem to see the issue that you describe E
as being unresolved.
i, R
20 MS. CYPHERT:
We did not clarify it for the Board, Your 21 Honor, because it was not assured how much detail the Board was 22 interested in getting into the actual. settlement negotiations of h'~-
23 the parties.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
We don't want to. go into it in-detail.
( \\
25, -We'certainly don't want to interfere or hinder in any way the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
~
861 negotiating posture of any of the parties.
However, it is diffi-( )
cult to follow your discussion of public and private interests 2
in a va uum.
S if y u uld indicate for us in some way what 3
(a) we're talking about --
4 MS. CYPHERT:
Precisely, Your Honor.
The issue is e
5 2
6 the Department contends that utilities that have applied for 7
license in these nuclear plants cannot continue to refuse to 8
interconnect in iiterstate commerce so as to avoid federal juris-N diction under the Federal Power Act.
9
- i h
10 Y u will note that I don't believe that issue is z
g jj resolved in the settlement papers that have been presented to you.
d 12 They have merely been put on the back burner to be resolved at F.
(q j g
some future date if there is additional time.
%) 8 MR. GLASER:
I haven't read all of the information g
g N
15 that attempts to address that subject.
MS. CYPHERT:
It does not resolve the issue.
It leaves g
B ul g
j7 it to be determined by this Board ultimately at some future date.
b 18 If d
~-
-j9 MR. GLASER:
Because of the refusal to interconnect?
H 20 MS. CYPHERT:
If there is a refusal to interconnect, 23 if the people have first gone to the F,ERC to obtain a waiver on 22-behalf of the utilities here which wish to remain outside of
'V 23,
federal jurisdiction.
And the Department contends that that n
24 refusal to-deal is a reversal of the antitrust laws.
O 25 l MR. GLASER:
I didn' t quite see it that way, but perhaps f
l
(
' ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
862 I will take a look at it again.
^()
MS. CYPHZRT:
The Department believes that the issue xs 2
that is before the Board now does not resolve the issue; it merely
('s) postpones the issue to some future date.
The Department believes 4
u that if the issue is to be litigated, it should be litigated now e
5 5
and here in this forum.
g e
MR. GLASER:
Is the Department suggesting that there 7
s a party to these proceedings that will not be able to inter-8 j
connect because of refusal by Houston Lighting and Power's desire 9
i g
to maintain itself from federal jurisdiction?
j ez E
Is that what you are saying?
y 11 MS. CYPHERT:
I don't know the answer to that, not c.
12 3
-}
today, and I don't know that it is incumbent upon the Department w-to produce a body that has a plan in mind for what will happen y
j4 U
forty years from now which is the duration of the license.
w MR. GLASER:
Where is the case if nobody has refused 16 3
M the' interconnection?
Where is the controversy that this Board 7
w 5
would have the power to look into?
m 18
=
{ j9 MS. CYPHERT:
I understand your problem, and the X
pr blem is essentially that you do not want to postpone or 20 pr vide a mechanism whereby people will be prohibited or even 21 dampered.
f-22 w.>
23 f MR. GLASER:
Don't you have to have conduct that is inconsistent with the law before this Board has jurisdiction?
~'
24
(-)
25l MS. CYPHERT:
We believe there is sufficient past conduct J
i f
h
. ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
863 and existing conduct.
n' (,)
MR. GLASER:
Wasn't that resolved in Exhibit C?
I don't know whether it is.
I will take a look at it.
(
MS. CYPHERT:
I don't know whether it is appropriate 4
really for us to be arguing the merits of a settlement dispute, e
5 Aj which is one of the reasons I was hesitant to bring it up.
But e
since Chairman Miller did, I want to lay it out so you can see 7
l what our problem is.
8 Mj MR. GLASER:
I see.
That is very hopeful.
The only 9
io issue then that the Department of Justice is concerned about is az 5
an alleged refusal to interconnect by Houston Lighting and Power.
p 11 MS. CYPHERT:
No.
That is the issue we have not been g
12
{~)
able to make any further progress on.
We have not yet gone on to 3
a g
consider the other issues that are before the Board at the moment w
on the interconnection.
We have not made a threshold determination 2
15 w*
as to whether or not the D.C.
proposal is in fact in the public 16 g;
interest.
In fact, there may come a time when the Department j7 b
18 w uld point out to the Board where there are specific parts of the E
current. proposal which were in fact not in the public interest.
j9 9M
\\
.That is a separate issue, and we have not yet reached a point of 1
20 analysis f that issue, because we feal the first issue was so 21 r'
Paramount-to the concerns of the enforcement of the antitrust U) 22 law that that issue mustLbe addressed.
23 CHnIRMAN MILLER:
Let me inquire, Ms. Cyphert -- there 24 V
15 l is not any effort to interrupt the cogency of your argument, but k
\\
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
864 it seems to me you are talking about two different things.
One
(' '
is a whole series of complex and discrete problems with which all o) 2 of these utilities and public bodies are concerned and which also
(~.
trigger the jurisdiction, as we understand it, of NRC and this V,
4 Board -- namely, whether the utilities under the license or 3
licenses would create or maintain a situation inconsistent with v-0 E
either the named antitrust laws or underlying spirit of purpose.
8 7
A Now, that, while large and complex, is still a discrete j
8 4
subject matter as we view it.
m 9
h MS. CYPHERT:
I understand the distinction you are 10 zg trying to make, Your Honor.
p 11 U
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Secondly, you were telling us this
.g 12 gg morning that the Department of Justice apparently would like to Vc use this proceeding or these proceedings, at any rate, in order to establish some larger purpose as the Department views it, 2
15
- s*
namely, whether the Department's functions, and powers, and responsi-16 g
bilities, a system of restricting interstate commerce, whatever
- a g
may be the ramifications, whatever may be the FERC jurisdiction E
and the like, solely to avoid jurisdiction itself almost ipso 9
3 fa to involves the antitrust laws that the Department is charged 20 with enforcing.
If I understand the thrust of that larger purpose, what I am suggesting to you is that either you're going to have to 23
' bring that desire of the Department of Justice within the scope (3
24
,)
i of the jurisdiction as well as the conservation of time and 25 ;
l h
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i x
1 865 energy of the Board.
While it would remain an interesting
[)
philosophical question, we would not be greatly disposed to spend x-2 a lot of time on it ourselves.
As a consequence of this, that's
(})
why I'm trying to focus your argument on matters the Board at least deems to be before it, and having time and other implications b
j Now, if you want to submit a brief as to why you feel e
that the larger purpose can be used by the Department of Justice 7
A for the enforcement purposes of this proceeding, of this kind of j
8 j
proceeding, we will give you leave.
But at this stage of the 9
i g
proceeding where the parties, under our suggestion and durations, e2 are engaged in an attempt to negotiate certain concrete matters, p
11 both multiple and complex, we might be on a course that would g
12 3
never collide or never meet.
rw(_) 5 13 m
I suggest you take this into consideration in your g
j4 w
^'9"* "
- 15 w
].
j MR. CLASER:
Excuse me.
The Department hasn't had a E
chance to study very thoroughly your settle agreement.
7 w
g 18 MS. CYPHERT:
Since it was handed to us this morning, E
I think that is a fair comment.
j9 R
I M
MR. GLASER:
,0
-You haven't been a party or participated in any of the discussions on this.
g MS. CYPHERT:
We have had a gegeral knowledge of the 22 w/
23 l f ur r.five p ints that were presented to the Board about two m nths ago, and we have had some discussions a month ago on some
'^
. 25 ;
f the specifics; but we have not been party to the discussions ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
866 which led to the piece of paper which has been presented to the
()
Board today which comprises an agreement between principal and agreed parties.
I';
That is correct, and for that reason we're not in any u-4 position to reassess it.
That is why I say we may be in a posi-e 5
5 g
tion, we may find ourselves in a position that we would want to e
bring specific matters to the Board's attention.
On the other 7
E hand, we may not.
But for me to foreclose that today I don't think j
8 9
would be wise and perhaps would be a signal to the Board.
9
/:d MR. GLASER:
If I could interrupt again.
Do you think cz 5
the Department --
p 11 MS. CYPHERT:
I can't answer that, Your Honor.
I would V3
/~N just want to consult with experts that we have available to us 5
13 m
and spend additional time talking to the parties if that would g
g w
be fruitful.
So I can't answer anything specific on that point.
15 I would liu to return, however, to Chairman Miller's 16 y
us additional comment.
I think it perhaps a very useful thing for 37 a
b 18 the Board to look at would be the advised letter of the Attorney
=
General which got this Department involved in this hearing to 39 R
begin with in the second occasion.
20 The advice letter stated in it that one of the Depart-g ment's principal concerns in the matter was that there was a g
u) n erted action among the applicants, not just one party making 23 l
(]-
24
- an individual decision to avoid interconnections, to stay out of v
interstate commerce, but a concerted action.
And the Department 23 e
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
867 felt at that time that that act was a matter that would not only
( j')
create an inconsistency for the antitrust laws but maintain one, 1
u and the licenses would further enhance that.
3
()
I think you ought to keep in mind the fact that you s/
4 want to make that nuclear power available to any place in the M"
country that wants to be able to use it, and if people cannot 5
6 E
follow the specific requirements that are set forth in the settle-I E
ment for whatever reason, that matter should not have to come
[
8
~
Q back before this body and be relitigated.
Q 9
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Just a minute.
The making of the h
10 zg access to nuclear power isn't quite on the same track as what 4
11 I understood you to be telling us were the interests of the g.
12 Q
g3 Department in enforcing the antitrust laws.
And since you are
(,j g 13 h
talking about that advice letter, which I think does get into dk many of these points, I think you must not only consider the 2
15 w
advice letter but the conditions which prevailed in the state of 16 g
Texas for about 50 yaars preceding it.
So the Department is telling us why concerted action or not, why concerted action, if that is what the evidence would 19 3"
show, would be inconsistent with or in violation of the antitrust j laws now and back when the advice letter was sent, back when the
'first advice letter was not sent, and back 40 or 50 years when L-]
these people in some of their allocations were doing almost i
exactly the same thing with reference to staying out of interstate
)
24
(_,/
(s 25 ; commerce and for reasons which you or the Department may infer.
I b
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
868 So you don' t just look at the letter, but tell us now
()
what has become suddenly so significantly different in term s of the antitrust laws that we are looking at, starting 50 years ago
()
and so forth, if you wish to pursue that subject as such, because 4
suddenly the access of nuclear power, you certainly would have m
5 6
to assure us how it would qualitatively change the reasons for 6
conduct which have originated in the absence of nuclear power, 7
n w
am s me g
a news da W e le uer uself M not 8
j go into, as I recall it.
9
- so MS. CYPHERT:
It seems to me that at the appropriate g
10 z
E time if we' re going to be arguing positions on trial --
p 11 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
That is true, and there's a question n3 as to whether or not we're going to have a trial.
Then it is gg 13 m
peculiarly important that the Department isolate its thinking g
g
- 4 along the lines that involve our jurisdiction.
You could possibly g
f.
g take the opportunity to brief it, because there is no point in k
us p
going into matters that are not relevant to what this Board is
- s b
18 engaged in.
E MS. CYPHERT:
I appreciate the comment of the Board in 39 R
that direction.
I am sure it will be very helpful.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
I've not conferred with my colleagues 21 on that.
g'V g
MS. CYPHERT:
I am sure that guidance will be very helpful to us in continuing the process.
I would point out that g
y V
25 j the Board has also been cognizant of not relegating its authority ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
869 to other agencies.
We reccynize that there are other agencies
(~';
involved in these proceedings and have individual responsibilities 2
in cases that are ongoing, but the primary responsibility of the
(~~)
Department is to pursue a resolution of whether or not the allega-(/
4 tion is made and the Attorney General's advice is consistently e
5 b
antitrust laws.
6 We have endeavored, and I think the Board has commented 7
3 before on.the large amount of discovery done in this case in a l
8 4
relatively short period of time in order to pursue a trial and c
9 h
10 an alternate resolution of these issues which one way or the z
5 other is going to be presumably in the public interest, since 4
11 obviously justice delayed and may, in fact, justice denied, g
12 r3 3 particularly in view of the need of this country to have a nuclear
(_)
g 13 j
m g
plant functioning.
And so the Department is ready to proceed with the trial.
2 15 w*
We do not feel today that we could come before this 16
.j d
Board and sav we are ready for a settlement of this case.
It b.
17
_may be that the profit parties' interests have been satisfied, 8
{
'but the Department believes today that it cannot tell the Board 9
R that uhat we have been presented with, what our knowledge has 20 been today would be sufficient to warrant this Board [utting the trial off any further.
(~)s 22 v.
With that reason, in our status report we have asked 23 this Board again subsequent to a motion we filed this month to
/-si 24 RJ i
set a. trial date.
It may be that an extended amount of time to 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
870 pursue additional settlement is going to be a foregone conclusion
/D from the attitude and the representations made to this Board; but V
2 I would strongly counsel you that if in f act you do determine that (a^)
an additional period of time, we hope that it would be short 4
enough to force the issues to a head, that a trial date also be N
set which we believe will serve the public interest.
l 6
CIIAIRPAN MILLER:
What is your recommendation, Ms.
7 A
Cyphert, as to the date of imposing any obligations, whatever they
[
8 4
may be, upon the parties?
c 9
i MS. CYP!IERT :
The Department really -- we filed a motion g
z 5
with the Board I believe two weeks ago.
I don' t have the precise p
11 date in front of me.
g 12 3
CliAIRMAN MILLER:
May 21.
5 D_
MS. CYPl!ERT:
We requested a trial date, I believe, the 15 nd week in July -- that is approsimately 30 days from now --
s I*
at least to have a trial date set by that period of time.
We 16 g
us
-are committed, and we are prepared to go forward on a track that g
18 ave us rea y pr eed at dat pedod of time.
wu
=
I would strongly, however, counsel the Board not to 39 R
put our triat, at 1 east to put a trial daec down pending what may or may not happen in another agency within a given amount g
f time, 22 v
MR. WOLFE:
What if you were drawn into settlement g
t yl negotiations more and more between now and July 8th?
Would you t/
I 25 l still be ready to go to trial?
t I
f, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
L
871 MS. CYTiilERT :
Yes, Your lionor, we would be.
I have been involved in trials -
and I'm sure many members of the Board v;
2 have been -- that are in fact settled the day of the trial or into the trial.
{
4 MR. GLASER:
Not cases of this complex nature.
I can b
tell you I've never been involved in one that was settled the
]
6 day of trial, not that involved cases that are every bit as 7
M complex as this, it not more so.
k 0
4 CIIAIRMAN MILLER:
Mostly it's jury trials -- the issues c
9 here are somewhat different.
h 10 z
MS. CYP!IERT:
The Department believes that a trial 4
11 dato should be set at this hearing conference today.
We believe O, 3g 18 an early trial date --
CliAIRMAN MILLER:
We want to commend you.
Do you have
-gg your trial brief prepared?
w MS. CYPliERT:
Yes.
16 g^
Cl! AIRMAN MILLER:
We would like to see your trial brief,
.t; 17 j w
g and we want to examine it in camera because we don't have the 8
h others; but we do wish to get down to the fundamental question g
X as to whether or not there should be a trial.
That has had some impact on negotiations.
We don't know about them and don't want to -- the product of them which is just now coming to light, and we want to analyze them.
g But before you start a trial where there are serious fm 24 1
t questions, jurisdictional and otherwise, as to whether or not there ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
872 should be a trial or what issues there are that simply try those
(' )
things, those things are normally discussed by a motion in court, v
2 and trial briefs would certainly tend to isolate these questions.
I"1 But we would be interested in that.
(/
4 We are not going to impose a duty on the Department, E
g but since you have told us that you are ready for trial and that e
you do have a trial brief, we would like for the Department to 7
consider submitting in camera, if you like, so that you will not
)
8 be placed at any disadvantage, consideration of these questions.
9 igg The Board is quite interested in some of these questions that Z
E would transcend, perhaps, the settlement issues.
p 11 We would like to know what the Department'c view would
.gw 3
be.
If you see this as a vehicle the Department. wishes to use, g
dg we would like to have your citations, g
g w
MS. CYPHERT:
We will consider that, Your Honor, in g
determining whether or not it is appropriate for the Board to g
s be viewing the trial brief before the trial.
I am sure we would g-17 w
b 18 w nt to take a look for our own protection to see if that might 0
somehow prejudice us.
39 R
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
The way you are considering it, that would be simply one means of what the Board is now asking the g
Department to do, namely to come forward with a showing that 22
(./
23 regardless of what you may discern about the settlement negotia-l ti
()
24 ns, why there should be a trial in any event to indicate what 25 f the Department perceives to be the public interest.
i i
-1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
873 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
The time for you to do that is now.
(~ ')
We would certainly expect the Department to take a view which v
2 significantly differs from that of the other parties, including
(')
the staff with its public interest responsibility.
And that is v
4 it.
We would like to know what you consider to be the law, what 5
the Board should do, what the jurisdiction is, what its discretion h
0 R
is, how should it be exercised.
We have the same right to any b
7 A
of the other parties who would wish to join in this, but if I l
8 4
can do it in a way that would not interfere with the settlement c
9 negotiations which are going fcrward, which would take a lot of z
E time and energy.
But this is an ongoing matter of the Department g
11 and possibly some of the o'ther parties may wish to address to
.g 12 3
the Board.
(~
13 E
So we're going to have a recess shortly to consider j
some of these matters, and we suggest you might want to give some w*
consideration also of that so that our record will reflect so 16 j.
d far as it can what everyone is going to be doing in the next 17,
w g
thirty days, or sixty, or ninety or whatever.
h Give that some thought when we are over recess.
That 19 3"
is all I'm suggesti6g.
MS. CYPHERT:
Certainly, Your Honor.
-MR. GLASER:
Could you tell the Board how the public g
)
_/ -
interest could be prejudiced if we were to grant an additional b'"
yll thirty day extension of time previously established in this Proceeding /
25 l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
874 MS. CYPHERT:
How the public interest would be harmed?
fl MR. GLASER:
Yes.
V 2
MS. CYPHERT:
I believe that the public interest would
()
be harmed only insofar as there is no trial date which is set v
4 forth.
In the event that a hearing does not go forward, obviously it would be very dif ficult for the Department to say that people should not try to publish a settlement.
Obviously any time that 7
A a settlement can take place that is going to take time and effort j
8 g
and presumably money for the parties and taxpayers, and you can 9
io get results presumably sooner than other times.
10 z:
But I would counsel the Board to think also about the
_p 11 effects of the public interest if in fact the hearing and ultimate g
12 fN 3 resolution is made.
For that reason we believe that if the g
13 Board grants a short additional period of time, which it seems g
g
- 4 inclined to do from the comments that we have heard today, that you would also set a trial date, so that for the parties that may in fact remain that we may proceed on.
g The Department does not want to have a record or be in a m'#
position of having held up the licenses of these nuclear plants.
X
)9 i We are ready to proceed.
We are ready to go forward.
And we would like you to keep that in mind in making your determination this morning.
7 g
V MR. WOLFE:
As Mr. Chanania has pointed out, I believe, g
the operation date, is that cor' rect,'at least for.
()
24 v
Comanche has been set for three months, is that correct?
25 -l i
a ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
m
875 MR. CHANANIA:
That is correct.
As I also pointed out,
{')
that is the e'aff's estimate, and there are differing ones; but, of course, that is the one that we go by.
():
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
That is March of 19827 4
'~
MR. CHANANIA:
No.
I think it is February 1982.
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
February 1982.
5 6
R MR. MILLER:
b 7
Mr. Chairman, might I just comment briefly?
N CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Yes.
g.
8 d
MR. MILLER:
On two matters.
First of all, it is d
9 k
10 Central-Southwest's position that the trial brief to the Board Eg by any party would be inappropriate.
I think that by their very 4
11 nature the trial brief is an advocate's position which covers the g
12 S
whole range of issues which might be submitted to this Board if Qe~ g 13 g
we were in a litigating posture.
w I would urge the Board instead to ask for statements 2
15 w
of position, as I think you indicated to Ms. Cyphert earlier, 16 g
rather than submission of the trial brief.
p 17 w*
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Yes, I think you ar e correct in that.
!E 18 MR. MILLER:
Secondly, I would just like to respond 19 R
l briefly with respect to the question of the public interest.
I 20 note that no one other than the three signatories and their
,q attorneys to the settlement agreement are familiar with its d
contents.
To characterize it, however, it is simply the settlement of differences between the three major investor-owned utilities,
~.,
as I think everyone will agree once they have had a chance to I
s ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
876 look at it from this characterization.
()
It is a conscientious effort instead to take account t>
2 of the public interest as we have perceived it a*, this agency,
(")
at FERC, and SEC, and at the Texas Public Utilities Commission --
x_-
4 the four major agencies that I believe are concerned about the e
5 U
outcome of this controversy.
6 E
Indeed, the settlement agreement provides for further 7
E milestones which are contingent upon positive reactions from the j
8 4
governmental agencies involved as the settlement progresses.
c 9
I do want to make the record clear on that point, because I don't 10 z
2 want anyone to be under the impression -- and I appreciate Mr.
g 11 John's comments earlier that he has been participating in this --
g.
12
('/) $
but this is a deal that has been cooked up by the big boys, and g
x_
everybody has got to take it or leave it.
It isn't that at all.
14 It attempts to take account of the interests of the 2
15 W
regulators, the interests of the smaller systems, both in the 16 g
Southwest power pooling and otherwise.
6 17 W8 MR. SAMPELS:
Mr. Chairman, I would like to make just 18 E
a couple-of comments as a result of the positions taken by the 19 R
balance of the parties here.
20 First of all, if Texas Utilities Company did not 21 1
believe that further delay or postponement of a procedural date
'/
in this proceeding would not facilitate licensing rather than 23 i
delay licensing, you can be assured that we would not be asking
-s 24
-(
)
w/
f r-further time for the purpose of continuing the pursuit of 25j i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
877
' settlement in this controversy.
J I think Texas Utilities Company and its customers are the parties most directly affected and interested in licensing
,,()
that plant and is most directly interested in avoiding even one 4
hour of licensing delay with respect to its use.
So we believe 5
h that additional time to pursue settlement discussions will facili-5 0
8 tate and speed up the licensing process, not delay the licensing t',
7 process.
Otherwise we would be opposing any delay of any sort 8
j in connection with this case.
9 2i CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Mr. Sampels, let me inquire, in the g
z E
event that settlement is not ultimately achieved in a significant 4
11 m
part, what would be your position with regard to your client d
u 3
f') 3 regarding the procedural and timing status of trial of whatever 13 a am issues remain?
g g
w h
MR. SAMPELS:
Insofar as time is concerned -- maybe I 15
&w haven't understood your. question.
g as CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Assuming you had to crank up for 37 w
g 18 trial thirty days or ninety days, and the settlement had not'been E
accomplished or had not been accomplished to all parties or on j9 8"
all issues.so that something remains for trial, how could the 20 21 parties be reasonably expected to get " % red up to go into trial 22 as speedily and effectively as pes,D le in reference, therefore, O) i
~.
t b th issues, inclusion of triaJ ptcparation and commencement 23.-
f trial.
24 MR. SAMPELS:
I believe that when it is determined within
- 25. -
- t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
878 a reasonable period of time in the future that all issues cannot I
be resolved, that
(-)/
it is absolutely essential that we have a pre-f 2
trial conference before this Board so that we can identify the 3
3 remaining issues.
Frankly, I am not prepared to argue the point
)
4~
today.
e 5
h Frankly, I think that almost even at the status of some 8
6
- g of the discussions today, virtually all issues requiring any a7 y
.significant amount of evidence are resolved or potentially re-l 8
solved.
I think what has occurred has had an important impact 0
d 9
f upon what are the issues before this Board, if any, by the time g
10 g
further discussions are received.
j 11 k
I can't forecast, of course, when that would occur.
p 12 3
Frankly, I would very much hope that it would occur sooner than
(]) y 13 later; but at the present time I think we can see the light at m
E 14 Wg the end of the tunnal insofar as the licensing procedure before 2
15 this Board is concerned, because the longer we are able to talk, j
16 the less time we're going to have for trial in this case.
So w
17 l I think that we are chipping away, if not eliminating, the time 7
18
~
that this Board will have to take in making the determinations that
~
19 k
the Atomic Energy Act requires us to make in connection with 20 licensing.
21 One comment with respect to simply an abstract setting
/~N 22 is) of a trial date.
Of course, that carries with it lots of other 23 things.
I'm sure we can go back with depositions and interrogatori es rS 24 l
\\J I and so forth, and frankly, I am not trying to take an adverse 25 ]
i i
t-ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i
879 position with the Department because we want this plant licensed.
(v)
But I frankly think that setting a trial date would be counter-2 productive to our settlement efforts, not only because it would
(^)
probably result in the use of valuable settlement time by counsel; v
it would also tend to create an atmosphere that I don't think is 5
conducive for the furtherance of the source of settlement b
0 discussions that we now have underway.
7 E
MR. GLASER:
It certainly would be putting some pressure
]
8 4
on you, wouldn't it?
c 9
- i 0
""9 10 ez E
MR. SAMPELS:
I will tell you one thing I suggested for p
11 a
the thirty days.
I will try to explain that because that was my d
n 3
3 last comment.
' f) g 13 v
m g
We do not wish to be an antagonist with respect to a 15 precise date where the world comes to an end or something must w*
happen.
We think the fact that the Board has been sensitive to g
16 the avoidance of licensing delays has had a very positive influence f
17 w
g on all the parties to date in the settlement discussions that E
we have.
j9 8"
I think the fact that the Board has demonstrated an 20 interest in being kept apprised of what we are doing has created 21 a positive atmosphere in which the settlement discussions have 22
()
gone forward.
And I think the Board should continue to keep such a positit'e interest in the status of settlement negotiations.
And
^\\
f
'~'
to the extet:t it is not unseemly to admonish, including Texas 25,
- l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
880 Utilities, to pursue vigorously and in good faith settlement
'[/
efforts.
2 v
But I think that if we have another status report in
/^;
thirty days, the kind of pressure, if you will, is there.
\\v 4
tR. GLASER:
How does that serve the public?
I guess h
I don't know how it serves the public interest.
That is why I am 6
asking the question.
7 5
MR. SAMPELS:
It serves the public interest, we believe -
[
8 4
MR. GLASER:
My question is how does that serve public c
9 i
g interest?
2 MR. SAMPELS:
I don't think setting a trial date per q
11 se serves the public interest.
I think giving the settlement the 3
3 opportunity to work serves the public interest; and we are inter-(oj g
13 m
ested in pursuing vigorously everything that we can pursue to p
g w
make the settlement work at the earliest possible time.
g MR. GLASER:
Does your client have a schedule for s
\\
continuing discussions with the staff on the licensing conditions?
w g
Are you going to further discussions?
8 k
MR. SAMPELS:
Absolutely.
39 k
MR. GLASER:
Do we have a schedule for next week?
g MR. SAMPELS:
We have a schedule this afternoon, not g
only with respect to the issues but to outline dates on which g
N.,)
We will meet next.
I-have also indicated earlier that I talked g.
g to Bob Fabricant earlier this morning and expressed a desire on y :
ur Part to talk with him so that we could further our discussions 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
881 with them.
So we are not hesitating to go forward, and we are f')
prepared to go forward if the Board believes that further extensioris 2
ss would be warranted.
(~')
We.are saying we are not being an antagonist with respect.
s/
4 to this because we want this conference to work.
In fact, we e
5 3"
believe that will f acilitate the delay, will facilitate that as 5
6 well as the licensing.
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Yes, Ms. Cyphert.
8
[
9 MS. CYPHERT:
Mr. Chairman, I just thought as a conclusic'n, 9
i at least to clarify, the Department has, as I think you will note z
5 in the first status report that we put together, we went at the g
11 pr cess of trying to come to grips with the settlement with a d
12 E
s 3 great daal of vigor.
It was not put on the back burner.
It was
("j
(_
13 not a matter of secondary concern.
It was a matter of primary g
4 5
g 33 focus.
w During that period of time we were operating under a j
S trial date deadline by the Board, and I think I can represent b.
17,
a b
18 to_you in perfect candor that almost all of our time during that
=
s period was devoted to the settlement process.
We are prepared 39 8"
t g
t trial.
The. time, and the additional time if one is to 20 be granted by this Board, will be used to pursue settlement if 21 that~is possible.
)
22 Et>
I Our-trial preparation is virtually complete, so that 23 i
~
the public1 interest is served by having a trial date certain.
It
/^
24 L) 25 l is not_ going to damage our ability to negotiate.
It will not, 5
1 I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
882 1
I think, impair our ability to come to an agreement to continue n
k-)
2 to look at the issues.
But a trial date I think will serve to 3
provide at least a road map of where to go next, if in fact a
(~)
(,
4 settlement is not possible in this case, and that is it.
e 5-And I would counsel with possible regard to consider the h
6 fact that nothing is lost by setting the trial date, and perhaps R
R 7
something can be gained.
A j
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Who would have the burden of going d
d 9
forward or the burden of proof in the event that there were a I
10 trial date on these issues, Ms. Cyphert?
j 11 MS. CYPHERT:
As I understand the statute, the Department 3
g 12 does and the NRC staff.
() 3j 13 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
We're ready for trial?
m l
14 MS. CYPHERT:
That is correct, Your Honor.
t 2
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
So in the event that we would have U
g 16 a trial, we would not lose much time with trial preparation A
p 17 because the Department would go first and is ready.
5 18 MS. CYPHERT:
That is correct.
E
{
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Thank you.
n 20 Anything further before we take a short recess?
21 MR. CHANANIA:
Yes.
I would care to make a few comments.
(')
22 One is that I perceive -- first, let me start off by saying L./
1 23 '
something a little bit differently.
(~}
24
.I basically concur with things that Mr. Sampels has m,
25,. indicated, particularly as to the weight of the Board's eyes on i
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
883 our backs as we go down the settlement path.
^
(us)
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
We're very poetic today.
2
-(Laugh ter. )
C; MR. CHANANIA:
I will try anything.
%s 4
(Laughter.)
il CHAIRMAN MILLER:
We're doing all right now.
Don't 6
E crowd it.
6, 7.
E (Laughter.)
J 8
4-MR. CHANANIA:
Maybe I should just sit down.
C 9
afe (Laughter.)
S CHAIRMAN MILLER:
No.
I would like to hear you.
p 11 (Laughter.)
O) 3 MR. CHANANIA:
The difficulty that we have, and we do 13 g
feel our representation of the public interest very keenly, is that
- s to the extent that a trial date was set and we were to have to g
devote our resources in a split fashion, it would indeed by counter-16 g
productive for the staff.
b.
17 f18 We feel as though settlement has been pursued very
{
39 vigorously without -- particularly this last month -- without the R
weight of a trial date actually being set, and we don't really g
perceive how, to the extent one can define it, the public interest 21 is served by setting the trial date.
It appears that the Justice 22-Department is ready to go if and when that occurs.
23 I would also like to point out that there is a Commission v./
decision which addresses some of the issues which have been raised ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
884 this morning in the matter of Louisiana Power and Light Company
.[ )
and Waterford case, 6 AEC 619.
The date is -- I'm not sure I 2_
v see the date now.
Yes, September 28, 1973.
(^)
Toward the end of the decision they discuss the public v
4 interest, at least as the Commission perceived it then, vis-a-vis M-
}
settlement, and the hearing which would occur after settlement e
E efforts had been pursued.
So I would just point that out for l
3 the-record, and.perhaps you would care to look at that case in l
8 4
your deliberations.
o 9
N CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Was that Waterford I or Waterford II?
g 10 z
3 Waterford I, I guess.
p 11 MR. CHANANIA:
I don't know whether it is either one p
12 (m
S of those, to be honest.
It may be a third decision.
It sounds
,1 g
13
},
like it is probably Waterford I, if anything.
U*
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Yes, Mr. Spiegel.
2 15 w*
MR. SPIEGEL:
I would just add or try to add a little 16
- g l
d detail to what we are talking about when we use the word the l
b.
17 I w
b 18 Public interest issues.
The Department of Justice quite properly h9 is focusing on the question of interstate commerce in an effort 4
i
~
to Sell and resell energy in interstate commerce in order to j
avoid FERC jurisdiction.
g Now, in the background of the settlement I'm not sure U
the parties have at faced up to the real nut, and I'm going g
along with the extension of time because I think we are trying G
to_ settle.
But-the big nut of it is that I sea no showing that I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
885 it is in the public interest to bifurcate the jurisdiction; that (v",
is,-why should the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulate 1
up to one middle point of an integrated system in Texas, and
/7 presumably the Texas PUC the other?
C/
4 W 've indicated that we might go along if there is 5
A some agreement between the two commissions as to how they are going to operate and regulate this integrated whole, or if there 7
9
- *9#****"
8 nj to be coordinated operation between the Southwest outside of 9
That is, in other words we're dealing with more e2 E
than just these private interests of the utility companies.
p 11 m
There are probably hundreds of small municipals and cooperatives d
n z_
q S
that are caught up in this complex who need to see a coordinated g
V g
operation between the Southwest and Texas.
There has been really no showing as to what that is to be and whether the D.C.,
as they w*
propose it now, is going to be sufficient to handle that.
16 g
us So these issues are not fully resolved and whether they w
$a 18 are resolved in a hearing in this case or whether they're going
- /
to be resolved at FERC, I haven't-addressed that because I assume g
9 M-20 that what these people want is a complete agreement with all commissioners, including the SEC, and whether we are meeting 21 22 with. standards or operations, which standards go not just to the e
Ql 23
_h lding companies themselves but to the other utility entities interconnected.
24 S
she is touching -- the Department of Justice is 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
886 touching on perhaps the nerve end, but the larger public issue
(~')
is there.
And I really hope -- I have been saying it, and perhaps v
2 the best-known utility company lawyers haven't been taking it
(
seriously enough, but it is an issue.
In other words, when this case is over, we want the small utilities like Brownsville to E"
be able to do business with anybody in Texas or up in the Southwest 3
0 including Texas Utilities.
We want to be able to call them up, 7
E as their counsel has indicated, and it would be available.
So g
8 j
we are' looking to resolutions of what comes out by way of total 9
igg coordination and a sensible regulatory jurisdiction framework.
z E
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
You would be given the same opportunity 4
11 is to brief insofar as it wouldn't be clear as to the primary functiort d
n 3
tN f NRC in this kind of a proceeding to achieve both the matters 13 i) @
g normally before our Licensing Board and antitrust procedures w
and other larger purpcces you might have in mind, g
w i
MR. SPIEGEL:
Yes.
That is the difficulty of counting 16 g
us out' which is your jurisdiction.
I just wish there was some way b
17 !
e EC, he FERC aM de NRC would form a joint body and resolve 18 E
the whole thing.
39 H
(Laughter.)
20 MR. SPIEGEL:
Otherwise you know what is going to 21
. happen.
A[1lawyersarecautious.
They will throw every issue 22-
)
23-in the case and say'okay, you fellows unscramble it.
Thank you, sir.
em 24
( l i
' ' ~ '
RMAN M M ER:
Mank you.
25 -l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
e i
887
~
l Anything further before we recess?
1
(~'t Very well.
We will take about ten minutes.
\\_/
2 i
(Brief recess.)
(3 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
All right.
We will come to order,
\\_/
4 please.
d.
The Boara has determined to' grant the requests for 3
6 e
extension of time to continue settlement negotiations, and hope-7 j
fully we can make so much as possible.
We, therefore, have 4
decided that we will ask for a status report in writing on the c
9 i
progress of negotiations on or before 4:00 p.m. on Friday, July 11, 10 cz E
1980.
Then we will hold a prehearing conference which will go t 11 into the status of the proceedings, including but not limited to o
12 3C q-)
the negotiations on the following Monday, July 14 at 10:00 a.m.,
(_/
g-hopefully in this courtroom.
s E
Secondly, we will deny the motion of the Department of r
15 wi Justice to establish a trial date and other procedural dates; 16 g
M but we will grant the Department leave to renew such motion and b.
17 w
request at the prehearing conference on July 14.
h There are other motions pending, but I doubt that it 9
R w uld be worth taking the time and effort now while the negotiations 20 are proceeding and proceeding rather well.
g We do have a letter from Mr. Chanania, June 6,
- 1980, l
\\
12
~s
\\_J p inting out that Mr. Stephen H. Lewis, who has entered his 23,
appearance on behalf of the staff, is a nephew of Mr. George Spiegel.
24
<)
25 ;
urselves see no conflict'as to the matters discussed in the e
- ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
_w
888 letter, but do any counsel have a problem, conflict or otherwise,
/~'
ks) -
with the appearance and participation in these consolidated 2
proceedings of Mr. Stephen H. Lewis, a member of the NRC staff
(~j')
and a nephew of Mr. Spiegel of the firm of Spiegel and McDiarmid,.
4 s
who are attorneys for the city of Brownsville and of course appear e
5-h at other NRC proceedings?
5 6
Is there any objection or any problem?
7 E
MR. BAUKNIGHT:
We received the letter from Mr. Chanania g
8 j
only a day or so ago.
We would like an opportunity to consider 9
io the matter and discuss it with staff.
g.10 z
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER:
All right.
You may have such an p
11 a
PPortunity.
Please advise the Board and parties in writing by d
12 3
S letter or otherwise of your conclusion, whatever it might be, e
( w) 3 13 m
after you have had a reasonable opportunity.
eg 14 MR. BAUKNIGHT:
Yes, sir, we will do so.
e G*
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Or anyone else who wishes to consider 16
.j w
the matter will also be gi.ven the same opportunity.
j7 w
g 8
MR. SAMPELS:
We would like the same opporLunity.
=
CHAIRMAN MILLER:
Very well.
j9 1
Is there anything else that would be useful to take 20 up at this time?
21 The motions seem to deal with various aspects f discovery or motions to produce or not produce and what not.
22 In view f the present status of the negotiations, I take it that 23,
there is no necessity at any rate, unless someone feels to the
~
24
/
7 -l cunt'ary.
I
\\
i l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
889 We will point out that no one can guarantee the ultimate
("s,
' outcome of the negotiations, especially in multi-party complex
's J 2
matters such as this.
There may well be other issues or parties
,/'S shich it won't be necessary to examine in a trial-type setting.
A/
4 We, therefore, ask all counsel to keep this in mind A
}
throughout your negotiations or appearance before the Board; and e
g we will meet with you in July to have in mind the fact that the S
7 A
Texas Utilities Company and others are sensitive to the timeliness 8
8 n
4
.of these proceedings.
So we do not want this Board, and you as c
9 i6 parties don't want to delay any matters that would otherwise be g
10 z
E impacted by our NRC antitrust proceedings.
p 11 Fortunately, we have found out that the Department of e.
12 Z
Justice is and will be ready for trial, which I suppose will be c
gs
(_). 5 13 the first two or three weeks of trial, will be used by the Depart-E 14 ment and its witnesses, which gives us some kind of lead time 2
15 w*
if we fix a trial date at our July 14th conference.
But nonetheles s, 16 g
6 17 de think in fairness to all parties and in fairness to the public w2 interest, we must have in mind the possibility of a trial, at M
18
=
least some issues and.some parties, as to those matters after you 9
s'"
have had the full opportunity to achieve, and which you new have 20 j very substantially achieved many agreements.
But when it comes to that point, we wouldn't hesitate
('}
22 x
to set a trial date rather expeditiously.
So please have that in mind._ We are not trying to interfere in any way or delay negotla-
_ ~'j 24
(
~/
25,l tions which we commend and which we certainly want to cooperate i
.i 1,.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
L:
890
.with.- But have that trial setting factor in mind insofar as it 1
Q
!"ay be necessary_for whatever parties or issues do remain.
Is there anything further at this time?
3 4.
Thank you for coming, and we are now adjourned.
(Whereupot, at 11:45 a.m.,
the prehearing was adjourned.)
e 5
5l 6
R Q
7 A
j 8
dd 9
- i h
10 j
11 a
p 12 O !
is m-l 14 2
15 g
16 w
b' 17 5
18 E
i 19 X
20 21 0
22 23,!
i 24 25 AL.DERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
'O noctran accutaroar com41ss1on
.This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the in the matter.of:
Houston Lighting and Power Company (South Texas)
Texas Utilities Generating Company (Comanche Peak)
Date of Proceeding:
June 10, 1980
~
r Docket !! umber: 50-498A, 499A. 50-445A, 446A Place of Proceeding:
Bethesda, Maryland were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Commission.,
l Marilyn Shockey Official Reporter (Typed)
Y
+U hW Officialp 7-o Reporter (Signature) i I
O O
_