ML19341B428

Motion for Correction of J Linenberger 810112 Statement Re Applicant Financial Qualifications.Requests Publication of Notice in Local Newspapers That Current Hearings Do Not Address Util Financial Ability to Construct Facility

ML19341B428
Person / Time
Site:	Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date:	01/19/1981
From:	Baker B AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-CP, NUDOCS 8102020178
Download: ML19341B428 (3)

Text

.

Jcn 19, 1981 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA e I # A.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p g BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '5 In the Matter of .I EOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY Docket # 50-466 C 6 lAN n a 1981 >

(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1) h

$$*!DdN[

~l7 =2 ,

Y

,,J

< '/

w  %

MOTION FOR CORRECTION OF ERR 0NEOUS STATEMENT BY BOARD MEMBER, FR INTERVENOR BRYAN BAKER Chairman Wolfe:

I am concerned about a statement made by Board member Mr. Linen-berger at the opening session near the reactor site in Wallis, TX (Jan 12, 1981). Following a midmorning recess, Mr. Linenberger specified a few issues which had been raised by previous appearers and assured the local citizenry that these issues were points in controversy which would be thoroughly examined in the forthcoming evidentiary hearings. The part of this statement which mainly .

disturbed me was the part that related co Applicant's financial qualifications, to wit:

MR~. LINENBERGER: Another item that came up was a que tion concerning how decommissioning costs for the plant will be handled.

Well, that is another example of an item that will be on our agenda involved with the financial posture of the Applicant and its ability to finance the construction operation and decommis-sioning of the plant. It's all part of the cost there.

We, among other things, have to assure ourselves that HL&P is financially qualified and responsible to carry these burdens properly and within the appropriate accou and economic bounds placed on them. (Transcript pp. 207St -

3J This seems a clear error to me. I have been trying to raise these issues since my very first Petition for Leave to Intervene (July 14, 1979), in which I expressed my fear that "the applicant may have W 5 great difficulty in financing construction, safe operation, and even-tual safe shutdown of the facility. ...

" Since then, it has been

/

repeatedly pointed out to me by Applicant and Staff that it is not 8102020 ' 77)

• MOTION 1/19/81 2 NRC policy at the Construction Permit licensing stage to consider the Applicant's financial qualifications to safely operate, maintain, decommission, shut down in an emergency, or dispose of the waste from the proposed facility. At the July 10, 1980, meeting between Staff, Applicant, and Intervenors, I argued (to no avail) against this policy.

(I am lead party for the financial qualifications contention.)

Mr. Black and Mr. Moon of the NRC Staff assured me on Jan 12 that there has been no change in NRC policy with regard to financial quali-fications. Assuming they are correct, I must protest Mr. Linenberger's unfortunate remarks. Althougn I do not believe and do not mean to imply that the statement was intentionally misleading, the assembled citisens were given the unmistakeable impression that Applicant's ability to finance the " operation and decommissioning" of the plant would be taken up and fully considered at the upcoming evidentiary hearings.

The people present in Wallis were those local citizens most inte-rested in the proposed nuclear plant, as evidenced by the fact that they had foregone their normal daily activities to make their views known or to hear what others had to say. No doubt many of them reported what they heard to others. Having listened for years to the argaments for and against the Allens Creek plant, many expected the Licensing Board to resolve the questions remaining in their minds.

l In such a situation, any remarks by a Board member have much more impact than whatever interpretations may be buried in federal regu-l lations (10 CFR 50.33 (f)) or in the voluminous record of this l

l case (NRC Staff Response to Interrogatory FQ/S-1.3 From Financial

. Qualifications Intervenors, Jul 28, 1980).

1 Therefore, if such remarks are in error, extraordinary steps should be taken to correct any false impressions. It would not be

• MOT'IOh 1/19/81 3 reasonable to ask the Board to return in person to Wallis, but I move ,

1 that. in the event the Board is not willine to return to Wallis, TX, to correct the record with recard to Applicant's financial qualifica-tions, a notice should be published in all newspapers which serve the area within 20 miles of the plant site, such notice to state clearly that at the hearings on Allens Creek now in progress current inter-pretation of current federal regulation only reouires HL&P to demon-strate financial ability to safely construct the facility, and that consideration of HL&P's ability to meet operational. decommissioninz.

waste storace and disposal.and other associated costs and liabilities will be costroned until the Oreratinz License hearines. to be held when and if " construction of the facility has been substantially completed (10 CFR 50.57(1))". Simply correcting the record of this case, or publishing a notice in the Federal Register, will not be sufficient to dispel any false impression left with the local l

political leaders, business leaders, and concerned citizens who heard Mr. Linenberger's remarks.

I was present at the time of Mr. Linenberger's statement, and I shortly afterward requested a clarification. (Tran. 2080) Since this was not possible, I submit that the only method which might reasonably be expected to dispel any false impression is the method suggested by Intarvenor. I request that such newspaper notices be published as soon as practicable.

l Respectfully submitted, cc: All parties mailed or hand-delivered on or before Jan. 45 , 1981 Bryan Baker 1/19/81 l

_ _. _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _