ML19339D044

Forwards Final Power Sys Coordination & Integration Agreement Between Sc Public Svc Authority & Central Electric Power Cooperative,Inc. Oral Argument Should Be Scheduled to Address Assertions Made in Rept

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: ML19339D044 ML19339D047
References
ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8102170146
Download: ML19339D044 (2)

Text

,

BRAND G HALL ATTORNEYS AT LAW WALLACE EDWARD BRAND SECOND FLOOR 3523 L STRE ET, N.W.

EDWARD EARL HALL

- February 12, 198 w^smucrow. D. c.20oos 6 cb --

se m r. mEe>n 8 (202) 347a7002

& l %

h S

1. 8B The lionorable Samuel J. Chilk -

W Secretary f% 2 8/ggg(I[/' "

I Nuclear Regulatory Commission N FEB Attn: Docketing and Service Secti  %, 12;g .-4 W

Washington, D.C. 20555 4 #['(:g &R 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

We hope the Commission will schedule oral argument on  :

l l

this matter, since the procedure adopted would otherwise ,

i permit many unwarranted factual assertions to go unchallenged.  :

I 1

i Sincerely, ,

e f

a ^A -

A m - ^

, - - - - - n -_

Wallace E. Brand

+

1 j~ Attorney for Central Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.  !

4 i i I

l cc: Service List .

i i t

i 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- %-,,_,-,.., , . . . , . - - . - . - - , . . . . . . . . -