ML19345C020
| ML19345C020 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1980 |
| From: | Saltzman J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Dingell J, Hart G, Moffett T, Udall M HOUSE OF REP., GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, HOUSE OF REP., INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS, HOUSE OF REP., INTERSTATE & FOREIGN COMMERCE, SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8012030752 | |
| Download: ML19345C020 (2) | |
Text
'o UNITED STATES
, ' [ ~,., (
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOiV s
.L f
WASHINGTON, D. C 20555 7,' ;E.t!I
/
%...%_/.TI-insi
-s 0M Docket Nos. 50-413A
~
5 50-414A
.,n-
_f Tu M$
The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman 3
EDj Subcomittee on Energy and the Environment s
1 a
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs M
M
~
United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This is to inform the oubcommittee on Energy and the Environment that the Commission has received additional antitrust advice from the Attorney General in connection with Duke Power Company, North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation, and the Saluda River Electric Cooperative's construction permit application for Catawba Nuclear Station, Units No.1 -
and No. 2.
This advice is rendered pursuant to section 105c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
A copy of the Attorney General's letter dated October 29,1980, is enclosed.
In his letter he concludes:
it is the Department's _ view that no antitrust hearing is necessary with respect to the subject transfer of ownership interests."
Sincerely, WI7R??surnug Jerome Saltzman, Chief Utility Finance Branch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor l
Regulation
Enclosure:
Atterney General's Letter cc: Rep. Steven Syms I
- ? " 75s y
Identical Letters sent to:
The Honorable John.D. Dingell, Chairman Subcommictee on Energy and Power Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Rep. Clarence J.-Brown The Honorable Toby Moffett, Chairman Subcommittee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Rep. Paul N. McCloskey, Jr.
s The Honorable Gary Hart, Chairman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC. 30510 cc: Sen. Alan Simpson-a b
i i
e
E111trb Statts' Brpart111 tnt of 3IIIstite
~
i3 w Asinwrros. or. mao 2 9 OCT 1930
.sse...N,.,10 ~,a Ni m ANitTRUST teeveleON Iloward K. Shapar Executise Legal Director United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
Duke Power Company Catawba Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 NRC Docket Nos. 50-413A and 50-414A
Dear Mr. Shapar:
You have requested our advice pursuant to Section 105(c) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, in connection with the purchase of ownership interests in Duke Power Company's (Duke) Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 by North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCMEC) and the Saluda River Electric Cooperative (Saluda River).
Duke's participation in the above captioned nuclear units was the subject of an antitrust review conducted by the-Department of Justice (Department) in 1973.
As a result of
~
that review, the Department recommended that a hearing be held to determine whether-Duke's proposed activities under the subject license-would : create -or maintain a -situation
_u_
inconsistent with the antitrust laws. Because Duke was willing to have certain. conditions attached to its license for the Catawba plant,- the Department recommended that the-antitrust proceeding it had initiated be terminated.
The sale of 75%
ownership in Unit 1 (56.25% to NCMEC, and 18.75% to Saluda River) was the result of the discussions between Duke and the cooperative systems in its service area that occurred after the cessation of those proceedings..
' Our: review of the information submitted for antitrust review purposes, including responses to our requests for relevant data from over seventy neighboring electric systems, provides no basis at this time to conclude-that-the participation in the Catawba Station, Unit 1, by NCMEC and t
t l
p\\D@N
'>11
f Saluda River would create or maintain a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws.
Accordingly, it is the Department's view that no antitrust hearing-is necessary with respect to the subject transfer of ownership interests.
nc
- ely, 4
k nfor M.
tvack Assi. tant Attorney General Antit ust Division e
9 1
i L