ML20009F770
| ML20009F770 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 07/14/1981 |
| From: | Toalston A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009F769 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107310572 | |
| Download: ML20009F770 (3) | |
Text
'
.* p
. gNs.
y 'ep*g:/
E#
l.
, em. -y w e t N'?;pge'* ~
- r. yngjaw.-
l.a.: a O #
Y t-
[7590-01]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NC. 50-358 THE CINCINNATI GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY COLUMBUS AND SOUTilERN OHIO ELECTRIC COMPANY AND THE DAYTON POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY NOTICE OF FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICMT ANTITRUST CHANGES
_AND TIME FOR FILING OF REQUESTS FOR REEVALUATION The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has made an initial finding in
~
accordance witi Section 105c(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, that no significant (antitrust) changes in the licensee's activities or pro-posed activities have occurred subsequent to the previous construction permit review of Zimmer Nuclear Unit I by the Attorney General and the Commission.
The finding is as follows:
"Section 105c(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides for an antitrust review of an application for an operating license if the Commission determines that significant changes in the licensee's activities or proposed activities have occurred subsequent to the previous construction permit review. On September 12, 1979, the Com-r mission formally delegated the authority to make the 'significant change' determina tion with respect to nuclear reactors to the Director.
Office of Nuclear Reactcr Regulation.
In 1977 prior to this delegation of authority, and based on procedures then in effect, the staff of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and the Office of the Executive l
Legal Director, hereafter referred to as the ' staff,' had reviewed the l
operating license application submittal by the Applicants. The Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company (CGE), Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric i
Company (CSOE), and The Dayton Power and Light Company (DPL) and had l
concluded that no significant changes had occurred that warranted an antitrust review at the operating license stage. Ti:e staff did, however, note the pendency before the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) i of an application under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 8107310572 810729 PDR ADOCK 050. 358 M
- "' c ' >
l om>
+= '88
- 2'
_._ _ _ _, O F, F,I C I A.. L, R E _C._O _R D_C O_P._Y _.. _..
NRC FORM 318 00. 80l NRCM O240
r o
+
c e
t 7
3 (15 USC 5 79, e_t,. seq.) by American Electric Power Company, Inc.
t (AEP) to acquire CSOE. In 1973 a SEC Administrative Law Judge had rendered an initial decision denying the application partly on the basis of competitive considerations. At the time of staff's review in 1977 the initial decision was under appeal to the SEC.
The staff was interested in the possible impact of the acquisition on the competitive situation in Ohio, should the application be approved by the SEC.
"By its opinion of July 21
- ^78 and subsequent orders the SEC approved the acquisition. Thus staff has been prompted to undertake a determination as to whether the acquisition represeMed a signifi-cant change in CSOE's activities or proposed activities that would warrant a second antitrust review at the operating license stage.
As a result of its analysis, staff has determined tha t the acquisition does not represent a significant change, i.e., it does not have anti-trust implications that would likely warrant some Commission remedy.
"The Conclusion of the staff's analysis is as follows:
'Since the initial operating license antitrust review of the Zimer 1 application was completed in 1977, the SEC has approved the acquisition of CSOE by AEP. The staff has examined the effect of the acquisition upon the coordination and competitive relationships among CSOE and its neighboring electric entities and, in addition, has reviewed the recent coordination agreement entered into by AMPO, AEP, CSOE, and Ohio Power. In tk.t staff's view the acquisition does not adversely affect the competitive or coordination posture of rural electric cooperatives, CCE or DPL. The staff is further of the opinion that the acquisition has not detrimentally affected the coordination and competitive position of municipal Octric systems and that the 1979 Coordination Agreement possesses the potential for improving the competitive stance of such utilities. Therefore, the staff has concluded that the acquisition does not have any antitrust implications that would likely warrant some Commission remedy and, as a result, does not represent a significant change in CSOE's activities that would warrant another antitrust review at the operating license stage.
'The Department of Justice has reviewed a draft of this analysis along with other material and has concurred in the staff's finding.'"
" Based on the staff's analysis, it is my finding that an operating license antitrust review of Columbus and Scuthern Ohio Electric Company with respect to Zimer Nuclear Unit 1 is not required."
DATEf
___ _2M95-32*;a23 nac ronu ma nos soi nacu o24o
yG
'?
,v g-p+
v,3 s
.gru, V7? y;f q
p-y g
y
- 9..: - Signed on July 14, 1981 by Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Any parson whose interest may be affected pursuant to this initial determination may file with full particulars a request for reevaluation with the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555 by (60 days).
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/sp. LToawce, Argil Toalston, Acting Chief Utility Finance Brt.nch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation CFFICE)
DATEk NRC FORM 318 stoc80lNRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- = *a22 27
_