ML20010G409

Advises That DOJ Does Not Believe Antitrust Hearing for Util CP Necessary Re Piedmont Municipal Power Agency Ownership Participation

ML20010G409
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	07/31/1981
From:	Baxter W JUSTICE, DEPT. OF
To:	Shapar H NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
Shared Package
ML20010G408	List: ML20010G409
References
ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8109180619
Download: ML20010G409 (2)

Text

- . _ .

4.lnittb btattsGDtpartmtnt of Justitt

• . u

' I WASHINGTON D.C.20530 A90stf A8st aftomset? CINEAAL .

A8eTIT AU57 08viliO8e JUL 311981 g

Howard K. Shapar <

Executive Legal Director U.S. 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 an ownership interest in Duke Power Company's (Duke) Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2 by Piedmont Municipal Power Agency (PMPA).

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 license would createBecause or maintain Duke a was situation willinginconsistent with to have certain the antitrust laws.

conditions attached to its license for the Ca'cawba plant , the Department recommended that tne antitrust proceeding it had initiated be terminated. More recently, in October 1980, the Department had occasion to review an application to include North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation and Saluda River Electric Cooperative as co-owners of Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 and co-applicants for the construction permit for that facility. After reviewing the information submitted for antitrust review purposes, the Department advised the Commission that no antitrust hearing was necessary.

Review of the information submitted to the Department has not disclosed antitrust problems attending PMPA's participation in the plant. PMPA's participation, consisting of a 25%

individual ownership interest in Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2, will not create or maintain a situation inconsistent with 8109180619 810828 PDR ADOCK 05000414 PDR M

l

- - - - - - ' ' ~-

'tho entitrust laws. Ua do not, therefore, believe it necoccary for *.he Commission to hold an antitrust hearing. -  ;

sin /cerely yo s,

! /

hlOf William F. Baxter

,I Assistant Attorney General 4 Antitrust Division a

(

g ,

5 I

i o

.'t 1

1 s.

?

.I i

1 1

0 i

k

(

0 7

i I.

. _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _. __=_