ML20003B968
| ML20003B968 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 02/23/1981 |
| From: | Bechhoefer C Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8102260292 | |
| Download: ML20003B968 (3) | |
Text
o a
s
+
Were b
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 6
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 8 24 Jggy, r e[c[$$fgfF ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Branch 4
Before Administrative Judges:
Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman A l 08 Dr. Frank F. Hooper Glenn 0. Bright PEag4 g
)
/
In the Matter of:
CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC
)
Docket No. 50-358 OL COMPANY, ET AL.
(William H. Zimmer Nuclear Station,
)
Operating License Proceeding)
)
February 23, 1981 S
4
)
$4 2
88 MEMORANDUM 1 g8 7
(Questions for Financial Qualifications Hearing) 6'
/
/
b g
7 In our Memorandum dated September 17, 1980, we spelled out x
e subjects which we expected the Staff to address in its evaluation of the Applicants' financial qualifications. Among these was:
3.
the ability of the Applicancs to withstand the costs of various contingencies, including extended shutdowns of the reactor caused either by problems arising at the Zimmer reactor (up to a maximum of a TMI-type accident) or by generic problems similar to those which have arisen at existing reactors and which have caused shutdowns at other reactors potentially subject to those problems.
In its prepared testimony filed on February 13, 1981, the Staff briefly alluded to this subject (at p. 29). At the forthcoming hearing commencing on March 2,1981, we invite the Applicants (as well as the Staff and, to the extent they wish to do so, the intervenors) to address 81022602fR 4a i
~
. this subject through their witnesses.
In particular, we would like the witnesses for the Staff and/or Applicants to be able to respond to the following questions to be propounded by the Board:
1.
What is the longest period of shutdown hereicfore, required by the Commission as a result of a generic safety problem or a safety probitm arising at a reactor other than the one under consideration? Give this answer both for all light water reactors and for boiling water reactors in particular.
2.
How would such an extended shutdown affect the various plant capacity factors, as well as the total annual cost of opera-tion, provided by the Staff in Table 1 of its testimony (p. 8)?
(In other words, adjust the plant capacity factors for the extraordinary shutdown described in question 1.)
3.
Would a plant which has been shut down as described in question 1 nevertheless qualify for inclusion in the utility's rate base, under applicable decisions of the Public Service Commission of Ohio?
4.
What is the longest period of time a plant could be taken out of service and (assuming its owner did not want to retire it from service) still qualify for inclusion in the utility's rate base, under applicable decisions of the Public Service w.
o.. Commission of Ohio? (J1f. the experience of Three Mile Island Units 1 and 2.)
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD fAnho /L}LAs Charles Bechnoefer, Ch/trman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 23rd-day of February 1981.
T i
l i
.i J
4 i
l
}
I I
N'-