ML19339D044
| ML19339D044 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1981 |
| From: | Brand W BRAND & HALL |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339D045 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8102170146 | |
| Download: ML19339D044 (2) | |
Text
,
BRAND G HALL ATTORNEYS AT LAW WALLACE EDWARD BRAND SECOND FLOOR EDWARD EARL HALL 3523 L STRE ET, N.W.
February 12, 198 w^smucrow. D. c.20oos 6
se m r. mEe>n cb 8
(202) 347a7002 h
S l %
8 g(I[/'
- 8B The lionorable Samuel J. Chilk 2
Secretary f%
W
/gg N
FEB I
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:
Docketing and Service Secti 12;g
.-4
- ['(:g
&R Washington, D.C.
20555 4
W Re:
In the Matter of South Caroll ric 8'm
- O Gas Company, et al. (Virgil C. Summer Nuc Power Plant)
Docket No. 50-395A N
Dear Mr,
Chilk:
l We forward herewith for the convenience of the Commis-j sion a copy of the final agreement between Central and SCPSA on power supply as approved by REA.
Please note that the provisions for participation in nuclear and other units are unchanged from the proposal that we had before us on August 25, 1980.
In our comments submitted on that date we stated that the terms and conditions for Central's participa-tion in the Summer unit would not, as a practical matter,
' permit Central to purchase a share in this plant.
Comments of Central, submitted August 25, 1980 at pp. 8-12.
The comments made by Central on the proposed contract are equally applicable to the final contract submitted herewith, and for that reason Central has not participated in the Summer unit.
Moreover, the prospect of any participation of Central in other genercting units remains as illusory now as it was on Augue:. 25 for the same reasons that Central submitted in its Augest 25, 1980 comments.
_I d.
We 'iad it surprising, to say the least, that the Commission Staff Counsel is willing to accept, without more, SCE&G's " assurances" that it would provide power exchange services for Central.
Of course if this were true, the short and inexpensive way to end this proceeding would be to incorporate those assurances in license conditions.
This was formerly the way the Antitrust Division and your Commission staff settled cases of this sort.
If, on the other hand, SCE&G is unwilling to set forth these assurances as license conditions, then the Commission will appreciate, as Central has maintained for some time, that such " assurances", if indeed ever given, are unworthy of further consideration.
81021701%
m
s s11R AN D 8 H A LL 4
s The lionorable Samuel J. Chilk l
February 12, 1981 l
Page Two 1
l l
We hope the Commission will schedule oral argument on l
this matter, since the procedure adopted would otherwise permit many unwarranted factual assertions to go unchallenged.
i I
1 i
Sincerely, e
f
^A m
- ^
A a
n -_
Wallace E. Brand
+
1 Attorney for Central Electric j~
Power Cooperative, Inc.
4 i
i I
l cc:
Service List i
i i
t i
2 j
i l
l
?
I l
i 1
l i
(
l l
f l
t a
r i
?
l r
0 1
L
=.--,-__---- - _..-_ -....__ _-. -,...-,,.. - -. - _, -..
..._...,,,....-.~_,,.4-..,
y-
-