ML19351D062
| ML19351D062 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek, 05000467 File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1980 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Loeffler T HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8010080664 | |
| Download: ML19351D062 (2) | |
Text
.-_
/EY o
f teauq#g UNITED STATES 8b(j[.[o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
E WASHINGTON, D C. 20555
\\e 4....
SEP 4G 1350 Docket Nos. 50-466 50-467 The Honorable Tom Loeffler United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Congressman Loeffler:
Thank you for your letter dated September 12, 1980 to Chairman Ahearne.
Since any decision on the results of the hearing before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on Houston Lighting and Power Company's application for a permit to construct the Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station is subject to review and final decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it would be inappropriate for the Commission Chaiman, John Ahearne, to comment on i
the matters raised by your letter. Therefore, I will attempt to respond to those concerns which basically pertain to the schedule for hearings in the i
l Allens Creek proceeding.
To give you a general background of that proceeding, I would only no6e that it has been and is one of the most complex licensing proceedings undertaken l
by the Commission in terms of the number of intervenors and issues in con-troversy. As a result of this intervention, pre-hearing discovery has been lengthy and detailed requiring tremendous resources and time from all parties and the Licensing Board.
At the conclusion of the discovery period, the Licensing Board determined that a prehearing conference would be in order to discuss the status of the proceeding, the schedule for summary disposition and, ultimately, the hearing schedule.
The prehearing conference was held in Houston on August 13, 1980 wherein the above matters were discussed.
With respect to a hearing schedule, the Licensing Board determined that due to an apparent conflict in hearina l
schedules by one or more of the members assigned to the Allens Creek j
Licensing Board, the hearing could not commence until mid-January 1981.
At the present time, however, the apparent conflict in hearing schedules has been obviated due to a settlement in other proceedings.
(See enclosed letter from Robert M. Lazo, Acting Chaiman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, to Jack R. Newman, Esq., dated September 15,1980.) Accordingly, the Allens Creek Licensing Board issued an Order dated September 17, 1980 I
(copy enclosed) which sets forth a proposed revised hearing schedule and
)
l requests comments from the various parties.
If implemented, the revised schedule will result in hearings commencing on December 1,1980.
- Thus, these actions reflect the Commission's policy to schedule hearings as expeditiously as possible consistent with the fundamental fairness and due process rights of all parties, scied8'OG@#/
1*
i l
The !!onorable Tom Loeffler 2-We appreciate your interest in this matter and believe that we have been responsive to your concerns.
4 Sincerely, ed 2. Kevin Cornell i
WlkkEam )J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
\\
Enclosures:
As stated I
\\
s t
l l
l l
l l
l-
. s * * %,,'c, UNITED ST AT ES J
- [ ','),
,p {
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.s
- p g
WASHINGT ON, D. C. 20555 i g;jp /,/
Septecber 15,1980 e
g',y
- i
- :
c d i: 31 Jack R. Newcun, Esquire Iceenstein, Reis, Nc..ran, Axelrad
-J and Toll 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.
-Washington, D. C.
20037 In the Matter of H0'JS10N LIGITIliG AND PCAER 00fA'sY Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-466 CP
Dear Mr. Nc,
.ran:
In response to your letter of August 22, 1980, please be advised that, during a prehearing conference on Septe:ber 15, 1980 in two consolidated anti-trust cases */, there was a discussion evidencing that there is a real and irminent possibility of settlemnt. Thus there will be no conflicting l
l responsibilities and no need to reconstitute either the Allens Creek board of l
shich h. Wolfe is the Chainran or the anti-trust board of which Mr. Wolfe is I
a nrber.
i Under these circumstances, the Allens Creek board my or rny not set forward the comencenent date of the hearings, an'd,'of course, that is a natter 1
that lies solely within the discretion of the board.
Very truly yours, l
l Robert M. Lazo, Acting *'Ch'..an Atomic Safety and Licens Board Panel l
cc: Allens Creek Service List I
- /
Hauston Lichting & Pcreer Co., et. al. (South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2),
fiocket No's. 5T)~-TfdA and 499A; Texas Utilities Generating Co cany, et. al.
(Coranche Paak Stea:n Electric Station, Units 1 and 2), Docket No's. 50-445A and 50-446A.
Ytyl-(L-gao9/r0f M
ETED STAES OF AMEDlCA NUC12AR FIGU1/iIDRY 024GSSlai
.......s T/E A'IOCC SAFEiY RO LICENSDC IGRD Dr. g g; S lfel thq49.re, Chairman She
- f. Imonard Cheattrn, Mecber Oustave A. Linenbqrger, Jr., Mecber UE:..;-0ELu In the Matter of
)
)
100SI01 LIGEDE AND P%ER CTERN
)
Docket No. 50-466 CP
)
(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
ORDIR (Septenber 17, 1980)
During the prehearing conference held on August 13, 1980, the Board advised that it anticipated the hearing upon environ:nental mtters would comnence in the second week of January, 1981 (Tr. 1747-48, 1773) and stated that the hearing could not be held earlier because, for one thing, the Board would not be available frcen Novenber 1,1980 to about January 15, 1981 (Tr.
1790). Ibwever, as is indicated in Acting Chairman Lazo's letter to Appl.1-cant's counsel dated Septe6 er 15, 1980, the possibility of a conflict in scheduling has been obviated, and the Board is now available to hear enviromental matters in the instant case pursuant to the following schedule:
Dece ser 1 through Deceder 5, 1980 Decenber 8 through Dece6er 12 Deceser 15 through Deca:ber 19 January 5,1981 (and continuing on all week days there-after) to completion of testfrony on environ-mental matters.
By no later than Septsaber 26, 1980 the parties are requested to advise whether the above-set-forth schedule is desirable and/or feasible, and, if not, why not.
In addition, Applicant shall advise what its doctraented past Muf 7007:2Loytr
. /
and current projected on-line dates were and/or are for ACNGS, Unit 1.
Conments upon the desirability and/or feasibility of ccmwncing the hearing in the second week of Jzraary,1981 are neither requested nor will they be considered by the Board. The mid-Jarraary 1981 ccumencement date will reain constant and unchanged unless and until the Board, after receiving cocments from the parties as herein requested, determines to adopt the above-set-forth schedule.
ER TIE A'ITIC SAEIY RO LICENSING BOARD b
M i
Sheldon J. % 1fe, Esquire Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 17th day of Septsber,1980.
l
't
TcM LCEFFLEFt
- couurrms, 1187 Dettset. Tamas INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COM M ERCE
= o Us==*
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES coTu"e",r%S
'= = " -
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Ys.erN WASHINGTON, D.C.
20515 H
"^""'"*'"^T' Aou e r September 12, 1980 The Honorable John F. Ahearne Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
While I recognize that events of the last year have resulted in regulatory and other changes concerning nuclear power plant construction and operation, it is absolutely imperative that these changes be incorporated into the decision-making process at the earliest possible time, and that increased development of this important source of domestic energy proceed as soon as possible.
Several actions could be taken which would insure the orderly and reasonable development of nuclear power, particularly with regard to procedural aspects of the regulatory process.
In parti-cular, it is my understanding that Houston Lighting and Power Company has tried for three years to get a hearing on a Construction Permit for its Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, without success.
Failure of the Commission to begin hearings on this matter has resulted in a delay in the planned completion date of this project from 1985 to 1988.
Furthermore, each year of delay raises the total cost of the project more than $100 million, a cost which will be borne by the Houston area's consumers of electric power.
I respectfully urge that the Commission give this matter prompt attention and that it recommend that the Licensing Board take imme-diate action to institute long-overdue formal hearings on this matter.
I appreciate the opportunity to present my views on this most critical issue.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
With best wishes.
Sincerely, Tom Loeffler TL:hgm