ML20024E977
| ML20024E977 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 09/03/1983 |
| From: | Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8309080056 | |
| Download: ML20024E977 (21) | |
Text
___
f s
~.
UtilTED STATES' 0F AMERICA cockdE0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10tl Us BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AtlD LICEtlSIt!G BOAR &i i
.r S5P -7 NI :13 in the Matter of l
r,. u'- r,',. rn...
- oPLICATION OF TEXAS. UTILITIES I
Docket FId[. 50-445 l
GErlERATING C0t4PANY, ET AL. FOR and 50446
~
LJ OPERATIllG LICENSE FOR COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC g
ITATION UNITS #1 AND 42 I
(CPSE3) i CASE'S MOTION REGARDING 9/7/83 CONFERENCE CALL i
i Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.730,- CASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy),
intervenor herein, hereby files this, its Motion Regarding 9/7/83 Conference Call.
On August 30, 1983, Applicants' filea their Motion to Establisn Schedie for Special Proceeding, Further Proceedings (If Necessary) and for Closing Raccra,
'nd for Expedited Reply. This was received by CASE on August 31, 1983.
In their pleading, Applicants moved that the Board " require replies hereto l
l
'hrough a telephone conference to be initiated by the Board and held on the nornir.) of August 31 or at such other earlier date as may be convenient for the Board."
l Since neither CASE nor the NRC Staff receised a copy of Applicants' motion until August 31, such a telephone conference call was virtually impossible unless it wet e to be held prior to receipt of Applicants' motion by the parties.
le Licensing Board set up a conference call for 10 A.M. Eastern time on Wednesday, Eeptenter 7,1983.
t 8309080056 830903 DR ADOCK 05000 Q
CASE'S MOTION For the reasons set forth herein, CASE hereby moves that the Board require the attendance and testimony during the conference call of James Gagliardo, whose title we believe is Director of the Division of Resident Reactor Projects and Engineering Programs at the NRC Region IV office in Arlington.
It is CASE's understanding from discussions on Septeniber 2 with Mr. Treby, NRC Staff counsel, that the Staff's position is that:
1.
Applicants have yet to complete, and the NRC has yet to inspect, any other rooms (besides the Fuel Building) -- which must be done prior to Applicants' receiving their operating license; 2.
The NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation wants Applicants to have an independent assessment program, which has not yet been approved by die NRC -- which must be done prior to Applicants ' receiving their operating license; 3.
That, in regard to Applicants' statenant in their motion "This proposed date for decision is premised on Applicants' projected fuel loading schedule of Decenber 1983, a schedule with which the NRC Staff agrees...",
the Staff's projection of March 3,1983, was that December 1983 was the earliest possible fuel load date; 4.
That items 1 and 2 above would tend to make Applicants' projection of a December 1983 fuel load date less likely; 5.
That the Staff's official estimate to the Bevel Committee is based on Applicants' projected fuel load date; and 6.
That the staff will oppose CASE's instant motion since the conference
call is not an evidentiary hearing with testimony, etc.
CASE submits that, based on the preceding information, Mr. Gagliardo's presence and testimony during the conference call is desirable and necessary, for the following reasons.
Following the recent inspection by the NRC of the Fuel Building (the first completed building at Comanche Peak), Mr. Gagliardo was quoted publicly as stating:
"The NRC said none of the items posed a significant safety problem by i tsel f.
"But James Gagliardo, director of the division of resident reactor projects and engineering programs at the NRC's regional office in Arlington, said,
'The question that you have is...are there more serious deficiencies out there that got through?' Texas Utilities' in-house inspection program.
"Because of the problems in the fuel building, Gagliardo said, the NRC will conduct unannounced inspections of other areas at Comanche Peak.
"No other areas have been reported by Texas Utilities as ready for NRC inspection. Gagliardo said that factor indicates 'the likelihood of them making that 1)ecember fuel-load date is pretty small. '"
' 11phasis added.)
--DALLAS MORNING NEWS 8/11/83 Attachment A hereto "A chief inspector for the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission says the builders of the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant unsatisfactorily inspected the first building completed at the site.
" Jim Gagliardo, director of inspections for the NRC's Arlington office, said Wednesday that fines or enforcement actions could be imposed if the utility consortium building the plant does not improve its final quality control inspections on completed facilities.
"Gagliardo said an NRC inspection of the plant's fuel storage building in late May and early June resulted in two nutices of violation for ' multiple' instances of construction faults that Comanche Peak officials had failed to notice.
" Tony Vega, supervisor of quality assurance at the plant, said he believes the inspection ' reflects favorably on our program' and did not uncover any major problems.
"'I believe this is a positive report,' he said.
"Gagliardo, however, disagreed.
"'I would not characterize it as being a good effort on their part,'
he said.
'We were dissatisfied with the fact that there were a nur.ber of items that we found that they did not identify in their effort.'
"... But Gagliardo said the new inspection turned up a number of problems with loose bolts and equipment that did not match design documents. The inspection, he said, also raised concerns about checklists used to show which parts passed inspection and which need work.
" plant officials insisted during the licensing hearings that the checklists provide proof every problem has been corrected. Gagliardo, however, said the new inspection revealed a more precise system is needed.
"'None of the individual deficiencies themselves were a safety concern, but the very fact that the quality control effort they were doing was not as good as we would like it to be raises a concern,' Gagliardo said."
--DALLAS TIMES HERALD 8/11/83 Attachment A hereto And following the decision by the NRC on August 18, 1983, to require a more extensive independent assessment program than Applicant; had first en-visioned, Mr. Gagliardo was quoted as stating:
"The new study, ordered after a special meeting with plant officials at NRC headquarters here (Bethesda, Md.), is expected to take four to six months once approval of the specific details is granted sometime next month (September).
"That timetable virtually rules out the utility's plan to load fuel in Decenter and start power generation shortly thereafter, according to James E. Gagliardo, director of inspections for the NRC's Arlington branch.
"'The probability _ of making a December fuel load is very small,' Gagliardo said.
' Pm not saying it's inpossible, but I don't see any indic~ation at
~
this s taye_ that it's a realistic date. '
"Gagliardo said February or March would be a 'more realistic' projection for fuel loading, but he cautioned that further delays could occur if problens are uncovered by the study, which will be conducted by a San
Francisco consulting firm that has done two similar studies for a nuclear plant in Mississippi and another nuclear plant in Detroit.
" Comparable studies at about 20 other plants have turned up problems at each one, Gagliardo said.
"'I'm not aware of any plants that have been clean -- that had no problem that needed correction or subsequent follow-up,' he said.
"... Gagliardo said the December fuel loading date probably would not have been met even if a maior study had not been required.
"He said an NRC inspection in June of the first building to be completed at the site raised serious questions about the adequacy of inspections of completed work.
The NRC will not grant a license to load fuel until all the other buildings have been approved by the NRC, but no other build-ing has been finished yet.
"'They're falling further and further behind in their schedule,' said Gagliardo, who added that scheduling problems are wide-spread in the nuclear ir.dustry.
4
"'I think the licensees (plant owners) tend to be optimistic in hoping that they won't have these kinds of problems, and then they are forced into having to face up to reality. '..." (Emphases added.)
--DALLAS TIMES HERALD 8/19/83 Attachment B hereto As demonstrated from the preceding, it appears that Mr. Gagliardo has direct personal knowledge of material facts apparently not known to or not i
discussed by other NRC Staff witnesses or counsel in these proceedings. The Board's authority clearly extends to its being able to require the presence j
and testimony by Mr. Gagliardo in this instance. See 10 CFR 2.718 and especially 10 CFR 2.720(h)(2)(i).
It is of vital importance that the facts in Mr. Gagliardo's possession come to light during the 9/7/83 conference call. Applicants ' have stated in their 8/30/83 Motion:
t
"The objective of Applicants' motion is the issuance of an initial decision by December 9,1983. This proposed date for decision is premised on Applicants' projected fuel loading schedule of December 1983... "
(Emphasis added.)
Thus, the testimony of Mr. Gagliardo regarding the probability of Appli-cants' meeting this phony fuel load date is pertinent and necessary at this time, since a ruling by the Board based on Applicants' overly optimistic and false fuel load date could prematurely teminate the licensing hearings before all the facts are known. Such premature termination by the Board could jeopardize the Board's ability to assure that the requirements of 10 CFR 50.57 have been met prior to issuance of the operating license.
The Board should be aware of other factors which have influenced Applicants in filing their 8/30/83 Motion. Some of these the Board is already aware of, but some of them may not presently be known to the Board. However, CASE believes that they all are exerting pressures and are an integral part of the reasons for Applicants' motion. Consider the following:
1.
The CAT Report discovered problems at Comanche Peak which had not been identified by either the Applicants or the NRC Region IV inspectors ;
2.
The NRC inspection of the Fuel Building, which was supposed to demon-strate that everything was fine at Comanche Peak, did not so demonstrate, but raised further serious questions about the adequacy of inspections of completed work (according to statements attributed to Mr. Gagliardo);
3.
The NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation is requiring Applicants to have an independent assessment program; further, this IAP is to be more extensive than had first been envisioned by the Applicants and is to include design as well as construction aspects; 4.
The IAP was initially required because of the NRC's loss of confidence that Comanche Peak was a safe plant, not only because of the CAT Report but also because allegations continued to come to the NRC -- allegations which in many cases the NRC was able to confirm were true;
5.
The unannounced inspections of other areas at Comanche Peak which the NRC plans to conduct may well uncover other previously unidenti-fied problems which must be corrected prior to fuel load; 6.
Fines or enforcement actions could be imposed if the Applicants do not improve.their final quality control inspections on completed facilities :- difficult to explain away in these proceedings; 7.
Further delays could occur if problems are uncovered by the IAP which the NRC has ordered; in fact, based on past similar studies, it is reasonable to assume that such problems will be uncovered; 8.
The open items from the SIT Report still have not been addressed; 9.
The Licensing Board recently left several items open in its 7/29/83 Proposed Initial Decision (Emergency Planning, Board Questions, and certain aspects of Construction Quality Control);
- 10. The Board recently accepted as binding on it the decision by Secretary of Labor Donovan that Charles Atchison was wrongfully fired for report-ing deficien'cies at Comanche Peak and that the reasons given for his firing were pretextual;
- 11. The Licensing Board recently requested the State of Texas as an interested party in these proceedings to investigate whether or not the firing of Charles Atchison for. reporting deficiencies at Comanche Peak was an isolated incident or if there is a pattern of intimidation of Quality Control inspectors at Comanche Peak; the State's investigation is currently on hold awaiting the report by the NRC Office of Investigations (see item 12 following).
12.
The NRC Office of Investigations is currently investigating whether or not the firing of Charles Atchison for reporting deficiencies at Comanche Peak was an isolated incident or if there is a pattern of intimidation of Quality Control inspectors at Comanche Peak;
- 13. Allegations are still being brought to the NRC regarding the quality 4
of construction at Comanche Peak (to CASE's personal knowledge, because we have put NRC investigators in touch with several individuals who have concerns regarding the construction at Comanche Peak) -- although CASE is not certain from indications at the present time when many of these allegations will be investigated by the NRC, since their current investigation appears to CASE to be severely and unduely limited; from all indications, the NRC investigators have not yet even completed their investigation (much less completed their report regarding it);
- 14. A favorable decision by the Board on any of many of CASE's recommenda-tions in CASE's 8/22/83 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Walsh/
Doyle Allegations) could mean reanalyses and/or rework or backfitting by Applicants;
- 15. Applicants are in financial difficulties regarding construction costs for Comanche Peak; the Texas Public Utilities Commission has an entirely 4-new three-member Commission appointed by newly-elected Governor Mark White (who took office in January 1983); the State Legislature recently passed a new utility-reform law which took effect September 1 which created a public counsel's office to represent residential and business customers before the Public Utility Commission and which changes the way utilities can be compensated for construction financing costs; 5
Applicants are anxious to get Comanche Peak into the rate base as quickly as possible (apparently whether or not safety concerns have been resolved); see Attachments C through H;
- 16. Both Texas Electric Service Company (TESCO) and Dallas Power & Light Company (DP&L) have recently filed for rate increases; questions which are difficult for the utilities to answer are expected to be asked in the hearings, such as the reasons for the continuing increase in con-struction costs, whether portions of such increases are attributable to poor management practices by the utilities,and failure to properly oversee construction by Brown & Root, why ratepayers should have to pay for sloppy construction, poor managements, ecc., etc.; and in the TESCO hearings, TEX-LA Electric Cooperative (one of the small owners in Comanche Peak) is challenging the plans of TESCO to charge ratepayers for 100% of construction work in progress (CWIP) in the rate base!
(see especially Attachments C and F, as well as D, E, and G and H);
- 17. Even if further investigations are not made by the NRC or included in the. operating license hearings, there is the possibility that the Texas State Attorney General's office and/or the Texas Public Utility Commission may conduct investigations regarding the quality of construction at l
Comanche Peak in connection with rate hearings or other matters under their jurisdiction; it is therefore necessary that the NRC do a thor.ough job prior to granting Applicants an operating license to avoid further loss of confidence by the public and Congress in the NRC's regulatory abili ty.
t All of the preceding factors are at work at the present time. Applicants must feel as though they are living in a nightmare world! Their carefully crafted i
i e
.,r.,
w.
u-
,,.,, ~,
,,---a
--,.,-m_4av m.,.,n,
- w. gm e,.
wr, ns v v e, w
.s.,
.q,
-, - ~
,-w s
-nn.wm,,,-
house of cards is beginning to topple and they are desperately afraid that any further investigations by the NRC, any further requirements by the Licensing Board or the NRC Staff, any further allegations which are proved to be true, can bring their play house crashing down around their ears. All the chickens which have been circling, waiting to come home to roost, must be looking more and more like vultures to the utilities. But it must be remembered that these problems are of Applicants' own making, through conscious decisions made by them through the years -- decisions such as waiting until the end of construction to deal with design and construction problems which should have been addressed and corrected along the way.
CASE submits that Applicants' recent motion is one more desperate attempt to force the Licensing Board to prenaturely close the hearings before all the facts are in for the Board to make a reasoned, infonned decision as to whether or not Applicants should be granted an operating license for Comanche Peak.
We believe that the testimony of James Gagliardo will assist the Board in making the determination as to whether or not to grant Applicants' motion, and we move that the Board require his presence and testimony during the 9/7/83 Conference Call.
Respectfully submitted, ru W h?d2 u
PA.) ~Juani ta Ellis, President CASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy) 1426 c. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 214/946-9446
Comanche e-C 0
mspections criticized By JACK BOOni Th. R/11/81 D.1 Staff Writer DALLAS TIMES HERALD A cinet insporter ior the U. S. Nuclear Reg.
e a ulatry h-~ says the budders of the Co.
2 ;g g 7 -
g ;- -m - ggggg wm g
mamhe Peak nuclear power plant unsausf.mior.
~ 4 a ig gr E
- h N U b o E E E
- 1"g
- go3 ily espected the first buddmg axnpleted at the Nb t
g,{ p 3 r 4 - 9 e, p 4
- p a g g "e s. 't p.a p $ g} =
Jun Gaghardo, doctor of irspectona for o c a ux, t- %
&ggsB$ 7il"5 the NRCs Arhngton ofixe, said Wednesday that E
gM o
,gj*Rg g
g g lgg {, 3
- aggg@g q(g7, fas or enfortrment accons muld be unpcsef if ggE g g ;; E a
e the uuhty ocracruum budding the plant does gR q Q
{ o$ ;., g a not improve its final quahty contml inspectons g.
, E, 5 g Q Eos on mmpleted facthtact (E g {n $ p
-5" gggx 3 E E,., B = 1 D
b w
Ea3 3
-5 EC Gaghardo saad an NRC anspecton of the 1
! EE
{ 4.;;'1 ;
$ ;f E=N$
plant's fuel storage buddang in late May and gF=3"E h M.m.
EE "s,4 g E =g $ g @.S early June neulted in two notacus of violanon 3s p
for "muluple" instances of constructen faults E5
~= E g g & T D
a that Comanche Peak offacials had failed to
&EEEoE
-Wo5g E h R 5." F S E 4 E E E % Y:
S EE42?f b
notace.
Tony Vega. supervisor of quahty asurance "G
O
,9a{aEgyajj*#21y7 2&ES g8 at the plant. send he beheves the inspecton re.
g
= ** a e 8 T g
""d a
gg=
3 g g E g; n g 4 * { g k,p $ " $q [e
- E flects favorably on our program
- and dad not qE&
g %'
o urumver any makr problemA e, ", g 8 o 4 *.
- l. E F x @ EA g
e r g
&a 4
5
-1 teLeve tha as a ptsauve report," he said.
$5 g g e Q g; y g
Gachardo. howewr, daagrnd e
- ! would not characterue it as bemg a good 2p9ga,3 gg_
g Rga g
E, 3
- E g:: B "*, = a a E " s effort on their part? he saad. "We were dasaus.
g*g[a=$g D
E twd mth the fact that there were a number of 3
E y, Q T h W3---
Egg =3ga 8E n }E a
p * - E a, $ {%
E!=,,m 3
stans that we found that they dad not idennfy j5 n [D E Eg"3[3 Q} M *.,
s in their effort.'
2*
E 7Ej2g~
o8 g
MA F g q$ l k,*E o* 9, 9 % u& E;;; h"E $o %[E 7he NRC inspectaon was the first test of '
- C*W Q
E*g the plant's insp<taon prograrn, whrh was the
,g gn 7 g oaS9j"F subytt of extensha tesumany in Lcenung hear.
w ings in May and June.
gRoIj E "E k g 7 9
- 4
- r D
.,7 e % vm
?EE*
7'Y*
A 5
(,"g.,3 Q**
p A mapr NRC construccon appraisa! carher tha year s.ud too many udpett;on actvices had
.. E., k n, y g R been lett untd the final stags of the buddmg p c." 2 { $ p}8 O${itgaygk')3g!kaf % g R g
li
- o. g g j ~
D prtxxn NRC inspottors said they were con.
1R,$,&
,n
-j 5m=g3g*4Px2E p*E D o=
certud that irsprrtors would end up being over.
F Q
h "l's
- R : E gx n g'
"="
workat and would rush the pb so satisfy con-U
-_g**bEg g M$
eds'3
^
strucson deadhna B
P
"C O
g $. 9 E " ;;l3 = y 3 }*m g
EE-5@*g The appranal aho said many design g 7 g W.a o9R g a.
ch.nga at the plant were not adequately docu-t' P g
e y
,E { 3 g E. ggpm 2a rnented, prevenung NRC inspectors to deter.
gag {gg,g,ggR3E g Q ga rrane whether n.ppment was instaUed aaord-g 3 :::n {e,gg., o q
,goog@g ing to the final dmgn.
g G !tj 4 g {a g n M 2 3.,$, R
- gg o
g ggg Officials of the Teus UuLees Generatmg l
g,"k 96p"-
E g g g ~3 ~ ;
G C=
Ca, the consortum budding the plant near G'en B*
N 91.
=*
"2R R EE D i: P a
Rcse. testified at the bcensing hermgs that the
$gk3 Eygl 5 E $ $ $ B. $ & 0$ D fanal inspecuons, which had not tuen completal E
at that pcant, would show the prograrn worked.
But Gagbardo saus the new inspection turned up a nurnber of problems with kame bolts and equipnwnt that did not rnatch dmgn docunxnts. "Ihe insptstaan, he said, aho raawd corxerns about cheridats used to show which parts paned anspectaan and whichneedwork.
Plant offu4als insatas durtng the Lcensing heanngs that the thedhsta provide proof every problem has taen corrw1al. Gagbarda howev.
er, said the new trupcetaan revealed a rnore pre-case sysicrn is ruuks!
- Nane of the mdwkfa.d defurncus thavn.
selves were a aafety cururrn, but the very fact
". hat the quahty mntml effort they were doing was not as garxl as we would hke at to be rahes a oormern? Gagbardo said.
l l
I l
9 I
DallasTimesHemld Action Line 2 Weather 2 t
Obituaries 3
" *7'^"* * ******* "
Study likely to delay Comanche fuel loading
_ly scheduled for -- -
plant's camers as auch as 31 m0-is granted somethne next anontlL he date."
other phre teve turnal up gob-power. currert Staff Wnter han a day, auxutbng m Homer sometime nrut year.
That tametable virtually ruhm out Gagliardo said February or lems atesch ame, cagbardo ammi Sdunsdt, manager of==h ser*
Schmkit said 'Ihursdays rh=4=run the utihty's pian to ined fuelin De-March would be a "mcae sum'astu
'Tm not aware of any plants that firIHESDA. 74 - Fed:ral of-vues at the pr. ant hang buut near by tne U.S. Nudser Hagulmenry ember and start power genersatz propetaan for fuel Inshng, but he hows tetun clean - that had rus ftciais amid 'Ihurudsy that the C*
Glen itcom.
Comnussion staff probably will abortly thereafter, accordmg to mutunned that firther deizyn auki ysMilam that needed correctaan or.
annnche Pealt utv.jaar pM w1]I Any delay ones w-E mJ' m the drxMe the S'.".4.000 asst of a small-James F. Caf artkk drector cd in-curur if prred*=ns are teinovered try = h= r-t icilow-up," he suht h
have to tsubrgo an examstve study enarnseed $3.44 bulum grice tag cf er study that would have been spectans irr the NRC's Artu:gton the stury, shada wGI be amudisetad The NRC seaff dareded a study of -
- .uu quahty that enutd the piant, which has encasmed usenpleted text manth, brarrik by a San Fr=4== ennsialterg firm was sweded after a snajrr NBC in -
r amt as much as 3M0.000 and is ener:ve mut overruns truse the
'lhe new study, ordered after a "The probabCity cf mehhtg a De-that has done IWO emGar enh spectatus eerber this ysar tauxnered hkely e delay piens to load r=1m>
t-iginal peu of $799 rn'!bc: was spedal meenng with plant of'tcials cember fuel load is very small." for a nur4==r plant ha &f-=g=d rusurrous ammersc;mus flaws that acaw fuel by Danumber announced in 1974. The cSday aho at NRC headquarters here is ex-Gaghardo said. *1'm not mying it's and another nuclear plant in A delay in the tutt inerene past would smah beds the ta=e when preted to tske four to ax months smpr==hle but I dant see any armh-I2eatst.
See CObfANCIIE as Page 2
\\
e
~
Comanche study expected to delay loading of fuel
~
(X)MANCHE - Freas Page One tiurn thst is huGding Comenche
,x, i
had -p=d the steentaan of qual Peak, ta asoply with the NRC ity-control.'_
-. at Comanche staff's request for a rasjor study.
Peak.
Thursday's order by the NBC Plant officials had proposed a staff was a turnaround from last less extensave study in May, but December, when the staff tenta-the NRC staff rejected that pro-tively said no study of any kn A g posal Thursday and said they would be needecL ht decinaca I wanted an in-depth study of was reversed an March after the equipraent that was ownplema.A NRC inpectaan uncovered con-and safety-related. The new pro-structaan problems and after nu.
posal will examme the residual-roerous allegations of s!.oddy heat removal system, a crurial work were raised by ictmer plant cornpanent in eccJang the rdam er.Moyen.
after a shutdown.
FM A. Purrie, deputy darse.
Gaghardo amid the December unr el W der the NRC staff, fuel nomdag date probably would said om rh=arha Femk review not have been met even if a major will be typecal cd studess conduct-study had not been required.
ed at the 20 =arimar plants in the He said an NRC inspecuan in cc.untry in the past year.
June of the first N*ns to be The NBC basan requinng such cxxopleted at the ate taased seri- ' studies afterit first granted an op-aus <p=assa== about the adequacy ersteng beanse to the Zhable Can-
. of inspectaans of -r.m.d work. yon numinar past an Caktornsa.
a The NRC will not grant a hr====
and than had to revoke the benese j
to load fuel until aD the other after==r====s demoovered they buddags have been apprmed by had instaued essansac supports the NRC. but no other buGdaag backwards.
I has hamn fianahari yet.
% said Tina () had not
"'Diey're falhag further and detersmused the emoct asmount it further behand in thess schedule." would has each day if tw ach.
mand Gaglaardo, who added that Peak is fuumbed by the end of the sebadanne problems are wide-year but has not been granied an spread in the ruelmar mdustry.
operetag besume by the NRC.
"I thmk the laconsees (plant He maki utJnses around the owners) tend to be optunisue in cuantry have pimeed the cases of hopmg that they wen't have these delay at around $1 rnilhon a day.
, kinds of problems, and then they although the amount vares ac-are forced mio havmg to face up cordmg to the type of fuel-od, to reahty."
gas or esal-that must be used to Schmidt said he expected the replace the power that would management of the Texas Utihtaes have been generated by the nucle-Generaung Company, the ensor-ar plant.
~
4
{
O i
ATTACHMENT C
~
Etiliiy OKs rniew a! C6,manche Peak L
FRONT PAGE g DALLAS MORNING NEWS Fri. 8/19/83
, ByJim12nderii
'v the broadened review also could washingtonsureauofTheNews 2. -
increase significantly the cost of
~
WASHINGTON-Texas Utdities the study, from.5250,000 to about
~-
! Generating Cc. bowed t'o the $500,000.
' wishes of the Nuclear Repilatory
".If we e.2d uf' submitting a Commission licensing staff Thurs. revised proposal and the increase J day and agreed to an exten:: ve de-in cost is substantial, will you go with me to the Texas Public Utiltr/
sign review of the Comancte Peak nuclearpower plant.
Commission to. justify that costi" But officials of Texas Utilities, Schmidtasked..
Owner of the power plant 80 miles
. You're big boys.You don't need southwat of Dallas, complained at our help, one of the NRC officials
, a meeting in Wenington with NRC responded The commission first requested 1 officials that ihe broadened inde.
pendent 7 view of the plant could anindependentreviewof theplant delay the December target date fer in Maren after a specialinspection licensing tne first of two reactors team from NRC headquarters un.
covered 16 potential violations of
' at thesite.
3 Homer Schmidt, Teras Utilities NRC requirements and expressed manager of nuclear services, said Pictse see UTILITY on Page 20A.
-(
?..
v
.s
{
i O
p.
20 A QrDana@crninoFew Friday, August 19,1983
$tility OKs review of Comanche Peak Continued from Page1A.
broaden the scope.of the inquiry,
% hmidt said, but it first wanted as.
concern about the large number of surances from the NRC that the re-design changes in plant construc-visions were "really..necessary" tion.
and that they would meet with NRC Before the special inspection, approval.
the NRC had told the utility that an "If you were to propose what you independent design review might have presented here today, barring not be necessary.
something else weird popping out Texas Utilities hired Cygna En-of the woodwork, you would cer-ergy Services of San Francisco.in~ tainly;get a favorable response
- June to evaluate the company's sys-from us," said Robert Purple, NRC tem of design changes to ensure ' deputydirectoroflicensing.
that final construction matches the The NRC began requiring.inde-finalplant drawings.
pendent # sign verification studies But the NRC,in a July 15 letter, _ for nuclear power plants in 1981 af-told the utility that it wanted sev-ter a design mishap at the Diablo eral other areas covered by Cygna's Canyon plantin California.hnic review.
supports for the twin reactorsat Di-The company agreed Thursday ablo Canyon wereinstalledimprop-to include an. examination of de-erly, leading the NRC to suspend sign and performance of a residual-the plant's low-power operating li-heat-removal system on the reac-cense.
tor. The system is designed to re ;
Since then, all but one of the move excess heat from the nuclear reactors across the. country await-reactor core.
ing licenses from the NRC have Last month. Texas Utilities de-been required to undergo an inde-layed its schedule for the licensing pendent design-verification study, of the first reactor at the site from Purple said.
September to December. Schmidt Schmidt said during the meet-estimated that the broadened re-ing Thursday that Cygna began its quiremt.nts of the design review review of the plant last June under could take two to three months to the more limited proposal submit-
, complete and that the NRC might ted by the utility.
take another month to approve the "I have a little problem with review.
them starting already, but not a se-
"Obviously, we've got to com-rious problem," Purple said. "If it plete this before the NRC willissue was an unfamiliar firm doing the l a lowpower operating license," study,we'd be more nervous."
Schmidt said." December's not very Cygna has performed design-far a way."
verification studies on reactors in Texas Utilities was willing to Mississippiand Michigan.
P,,
W a3 l,,
A ATTACHMENT D e
]i DP&L seeks hike' 1
of 8104.8 million
~
DALLA 5 MORNING NEWS 7/16/83 By Bill Lodge 5i stan writerof ne wews EFFECT OF PROPOSED -
DP&L RATE INCREASE Dallas Power & Light Co. is seek-ing a rate increase that would raise Dallas Power & Light Co. ls seeking Pub.
a the average residential customer's 7ates annuany by $
""* ' " P*
monthly bill by about $12.50, com- (14.4 percentl. If approved, the rate in-pany officials said Friday, crease would have the following ettect on Expenses related to construc-rn nthly blits:
tion of the Comanche Peak nuc! car yegsyCust hh N
power plant are responsible for tricity in an average month. DP&L plan "about half of the (requested) in-would raise the average monthly bill to crease," DP&L spokesman Charles $81.89, an increase of 18 percent.
Carter said.
a sman Buesness Customers - Now pay increased interest rates on loans $219 for 3.000 kilowatt hours of electrk>
lty in an average montts DPAL plan i-were cited by utility officials as an-would incrosse the average monthly bin
- /
other major factor in the decision to $245.28. a boost of 12 percent.
to seek additional revenue.
m Rates for enoustries customers are The request, filed Friday with identical to those for smatt businessee.
the Public Utility Commission in ScORCE: Damas Power & Ught Co.
Austin, seeks $104.8 million more revenue annually - a 14.4 percent ne m Morning News increase in DP&L's combined an-the monthly charge for typical nual residential and commercial small businesses to $245.28, he said, income.
DP&L rought an increase of Carter said residential rates 580.6 mi'.:fon in 1981, but the PUC would increase about 18 percent if granted only 556.2 million of that the PUC approves the DP&L re-amount, Carter said.
quest. Commercial rates would go DP&L serves 335,000 customers up about 12 percent, he said.
in Dallas County. It is one of three DP&L olficials said a typical res-powerdelivery subsidiaries of Dal-idential customer uses 1,000 ki-las-based Texas Utilities Co.
e towatt hours of electricity a month Texas Power & Light Co., one of and pays monthly bills averaging ~ DP&L'ssisterfirms,soughtPUCap 569.40. Carter said monthly residen-proval for a $188 million rate in.
tial bills will averege 581.89 if the crease in 1982 but received bp-PUC grants all of the requested rate proval of only $72 million of that increase.
amount. The third Texas Utilities A typical small business uses subsidiary, Texas Electric Service 3,600 kilowatt hours in an average Co., is seeking PUC pertnission to month and pays $219, Carter said. increase its rates by an annual total The DP&L proposal would increase of $195 million.
9 DP&L~"
re4uests
~..
s
.. m.m m msmus m o rate hike,! Residential rates would increase 18%
By JACK BOOrrH I
U RATES - Freat Page One this year, because work on the Itesadentra2 custerners now pay ing costs were the single largest Staff Writer plant is beldnd schedule.
a flat monthly rate of $70.05 per reason for the propread increase Dallas Power & Light Co. on r said the Inerosse was necessary Utahty officials said the plant's 1.00016dowatt. hours of usage. Ura-DP&L wants to charges its cus-l h==== of inflation and high con-cast wdl be revised upward af the der the proposal, rates would very tomers for $50.2 nulhon an finene-j Fnday filed a request for a record y"
$104 8 rmthon rate hike - half of g struction costs for the company, fuel is not loaded before 1984.1he in winter and sumrner and aver-ing costs for Comanche Peelt A
[
whrh was attnbuted in costs of which provides servloe to about delay would cost rnembers of the age $77.95 per 1.000 kalowatt-rate increase tn 1978 called for
)
rmannng the Comanche Peak nu.
949.000 people inrun== Universi. cornortium 'as much as $500.000 a hours of consumpoon. A bi!! that only $3.7 milhon in fmancmg
, tear plant.
y ty Park. Highland Park and Cock, day, a utility official has sand.
is now $50 a month would go up charges for the nuclear plant.
The proposed.meresse, filed --
red Hill Under the proposal, residential to $53.94 in the wmter and $63 64 Don J. Harnpton, vice president Isils wayld be increased by 18 an the summer and chief financial officer of
'wath the state Public Utahty Com R
.th.e interest cost on the Percent, compared to a 12.7 per.
By fding now, the company DP&L. amad the amount of con.
'!mamon. would rame residential 8
"#s debt has m cent hike in 1981. Busmess bills avoided a new rate law. scheduled struction rnoney spent by the arn-rates by 18 percent, with the:
in h h
woL83'l 80 uP12 partent, mmpared to take effeet Sept.1. that changes pany from 1978 through 1982 was average monthly tall gomg from to DP L he to 1* percent in 1981, and bills for the way uubties can be compen- " staggering."
$50 to $59-filed with tt'e PUC. W h large industrial users would go 72 sated for constructen fmanctng in the last DP&L rate case, the
'I Of every dallar on a customer's ments asad 90 percent of the cur-t.
m an !! per-c sta.
the mmpany a bal tail, an estimated 12 cents would rent financing costs are attribut cent hike m 1981. Municipal tails Untd the Legislature modified its customers for interest charges
~
pay interest charges on construe' able to M M wedd increase by 21 percent, state tatility regulations last on 79 pertent of the construction
'taan loans for Comam.tw Peak lhe current projected cost for cornpared to the current 9.1 month. interest charges on con-rnoney. DP&L now warats to tall near Glen Rome, compared to the the two tvectors at Comanche percent.
'structen work in progress were a for 100 pertent of the finance current 7 cents according to Peakis $3.44 tallaan with produc '
Ms. Hunter said the changes re. routme part of company costs charges on the $503 mdhon in out.
DPkL spokeswoma n Joan taan of electricity scheduled to be-sulted from studies of how much used in argumg for a rate m-standmg construction debt. Chas-The company Lst requested a Sin siext year.N nanclear plant as each class et customer mots the crease. N Legislature decided somers will begin repaying the >
Hunter rate irwrease m February 1981.
owned by a comorthan oi nx utd.
utility for the electridty that is that the interest shcsd! be al-debt when the plant begind d ities, with DP&L owning 18.3 per-used. She sand some customers, m.
Iowed only as an " exceptional operauon.
when it was granted a $56.2 nul, bon increase af ter askmg for $80 8 cent of the plant. h consortsum cluding residential ones, paid less form of rate rebef." but the mee-Hampton said the atahty to 9 announced last week that kndmg these a fair ahore in the past. She sure inl! not apply to rate cassa charge customers for financing is %
l malhon. Ms. Hunter sand any new l
rates would not take effect before of fuel at er plant-the last susp said ander the cierrent proposal, ided before Sept.1.
needed if the company is so ree3 before opseations begin - has every class of service wonda payw Company officials amid financ-~maun financsally healthy.
~
r
next year.
1he proposal calls for lugher been,
- by three snonths the cost of smasrating electrusty rates in the summer than in the unta Dressaber, tlw second delay
- for that group.
wmter, mrapered to the current flat rate, and for a higher percent-age increast for resadentant users than for industries and txaminesset DP&L presadent W.W.. Aston See RATES en Page 18 -
20 A chtpallaglerniaoFriu.s Wednesday, August 3 Rura co op Itural electric cooperative cha lenges challen*ges TESCO plan TESCO p an:
3 1
DALLASMORNINGftENS
' C ntinued fr m Page 17A.
have to pay $11.5 million annually
{
Ily Bill Lcxige 8/31/83:
Fort Worth based TESCO is seek. to save only 51.5 million in lower Ing a rate hike of 5195 mi!! ion in a interest rates attributed to the san writer of The News pac,kage that includes the request Triple A bond rating.
A rural electric cooperative it for 100' percent CWIP payments.
David C. Ewert, professor of challenging the plans of Texas TESCO is one of three subsidiaries finance and director of the execu.
Electric Service Co. to charge ra.
of. Dallas based Texas Utilities Co.
tive master of business administra.
tepayers for 100 percent of the irj.
that, together, own nearly 88 per. tion program at Georgia State Uni.
terest on loans for construction cent of the Comanche Peak nuc! car versity in Atlanta, Ga., also noted prior to completion of power power plant.
that TESCO and sister firms Dallas l
plants.
. Comanche
- Peak, currently Power & Light Co.and Texas Power i
Consultants for Nacogdoches.
budgeted at $3.11 billion, is the & Light Co. are the only utilities in based Tex-1a Electric Cooperative largest construction project ever the nation that have Triple-A rat.
of Texas Inc.say TESCO's plans will undertaken by Texas Utilitics. The ings.
cost ratepayers $10 million cnnu.
plant is under construction 80 "The customers would stand to ally in unnecessary charges.
miles southwest of Dallas near lose 510 million per year when the TESCO spokesman George Gl.en Rose, Somervell County. It is company seeks extra coverage to liedrick said Tuesday that the util.
scheduled to be comp!cted by Dec. obtain Triple-A-rated hor.ds,"
ity disagrees with Tex La's position 31,1985.
Ewert testified.
and believes that 100-percent pay.
Tex-La holds a 2.16 percent own.
Another Tex.La co.a@ rat, J.
ment fer interest on construction ership interest in Comanche Peak, Bertram Solomon of Atlanta-based work in progress (CWIP) actually but it also buys electricity from the Southern Engineering Co., said he will save ratepayers $800 million in Texas Utihties system and is inter. concluded that it was unnecessary interest charges for each $1 billion vening in the TESCO rate case be.
for TESCO to charge the 100 per.
f in construction projects.
fore the PUC.
cent interest payments in its " rate a
The state Public Utility Commis-
'TESCO officials have stated that base in order for f.t to remain a 5
sion will have to settle the dispute 100' percent interest payments are financially sound and financially 9
l af ter rate hearings begin Sept. 6 in necessary to maintain the firm's viable utility."
-4 l
Austin.
Trip!c.A bond rating and financial liedrick said Tuesday that 71 Picase see RURAL on Page 20A.
integrity.
TESCO officials had rot concluded But in written testimony filed their analysis of the testimony of last week with the PUC, a Tex La Ewert and Solomon and could not consultant said ratepayers will comment immediately.
z
'PLC chief _
w 7
i I')
-. 4-expects
- j a
~
new term f
DALLAS MORNING NEWS i
4 uasur.u.f n v 8/31/83 3
AUSTIN - Public Utility Com-mission Chairman Al Erwin,whose term expires Wednesday, said this week that he expects Gov. Mark White to reappoint hin:.
Ernin, the friend whom White tapped in February to fill the va-car.cy left by the unexpected resig-nation cf Commissioner George Cowden, joked,"I'm up for parole, but I dont think I have much chance.
j "I wouldn't feel too good about
~ leaving in the middle of the Bell case," Erwin said more seriously. A hearing on Southwestern Bell's record $1.7 billion rate-increase re-quest is scheduled to begin Oct.11, but a PUC orderis not expected un-tilFebruary.
Erwin has indicated that he does not plan to complete a six. year term if he is reappointed. In 1975,
- he was named one of the PUC's first
- three members, but he resigned in 1979 to write a novel.
Erwin said he has not spoken re-
- cently to White about his term.The governor has been meeting pri.
vately with sides this week to fill
?j' numerousjob openings.
One of those is the new job of public counsel for utility cases, a job that will bo created Thursday by the utility. reform law passed by the 1983 legislature. Tuesday, White's aides released a list of 10 applicants for the consumer advo.
cate post and said the choice will be announced byThursda*y.
The contenders are Consumers Union attorney Carol Barger and PUC attorney Mark Zeppa, the pre-sumed front. runners; Dallas attor-g ney Ray Besing: Austin lawyers
,o Jerry Cain, Geoffrey Gay and Mike James; William Dickman Jr. of Sad f
Antonio; Donald Kenneth Hill of Houston; David Sullivan of Amar-illo, and Sheila Jackson, Lee, a Houston lawyer who was previ-
'y I
ously considered for White's j'4
" housewife" spot on the PUC.
The public counsel will repre.
sent residential ratepayers in elec.
,]
tric and telephene cases at the PUC j
and in gas utility cases at the Texas Railroad Commission.
ATTACHMENT H
..q
.n t.
i b
Friday, September 2,1983 ChrDalladjileraingelus 13 TEXAS & SOUTHWEST
- r* Ta= 8 8astW news, Page 22A,
e Ratepayers' advocate ria11ihde
,\\
By Jackie Calrnes Ry '
f Consumer groups hsd been cager Austin Hurrass of The.'.<ws for Whith to fillthe C[fige so the coun; AUSTIS - tengtime consumdr ad.
sel could begitt theLfight against South; vocate.hm Boyle gave up an uricertain T
@9 western BcH'rit.4 billiod rate increast r;.,e for the Tem Senate Thursday to
. m M-request and Texsarylectrickrvice Co.'s h,, "
- M.;
St95 million reqtiest /...a{ ; a l {
accept Gov'.'.t.stk White's nomination X
as the cate's strat utility customers' White al'so riap' 5 -'?
man Al Erwin.b.pirited PUC Cha$
tepreses: ve.
'i '
y e{
a sicyear term on "My goalis gomg to be to see that all
?(.;
Thursday. Erwinjoked afterward that those Tex. ins receiving an affordable M
,.I he had bee:i're.56Hftacei!.+.'
f; ar8p+ C%P'-%j'[' hc Erwirt.joir,ed'other utility experts th basic telephone service now will con-mf
- tmue to receive." said Boyle, who will praist White's 'cho}Es of Bo le. Ite r tepsycrs of titis state willi elwell rep $
fL, 1 FUQS JZ" -
serve a two year term. "Second. we are going to look at every utility rate in.
vP a']O CMr e.
- 'T resentedj"ErMnshl'dC y"'r!
7.-
crease that comes our way and try to
=1' "This will bring a bew'.dimention to M
~ M*"g{.d
. % "* M E ?C mye them a low <al diet. We're going to
.)
the regulatory : process,"-Erwin said,.
try to take out esery bit of fat that's in Boyle. 39. is a 1 ast president an[1 lob.
d2$.
"As comm,tssioncrr., We cru'ltmited as tp there."
HN
.f.
what we can.crdd, ray wnat's in the:
record. Oftchtimesl*the recgrd has nct hvist for the Tesm. Consumer Associa-
-w; tion. He was coluunder of a group that Jim Boyle strongest inta'ryeners were there for
!cbbied for creatros. of the Public Util-Ity Commtssion in the early 1970s. He "ts a fantastic opportunity to represeitt industrial cytomers pr wholesale cus.
tomus.,
has been a legal. services lawyer in Loa-ratepayers when they need it' the
,,l
,,g..
asiana and a Washington lobbyist for most."
Austin, attorney. Moi Butler, who Ihe Consumer Federation.
White made his lon;; awaited an.
represents Texas cjtles in yllity cares.
Boyle also htlpd. tound the con.
nouncement Thursday, the day the said Boyle support &d utility regulation auraerlaw section of the State Bar of state's new tttihty-reform law takes ef.
"back beforeit bgejrme topical."
Texas and is a meraber of the Con-f ect.
Ut,ilityt consultantYhck.}Iopper pf sumer Advisory Council for the Fed-The law created the nubhc coudsel's Austin smd."Ther6 wasn't anyode else eral Reserse Board office to represent residential and busi. on White's list wh)'. cool $bave mobil.
lie recently twcame a candidate for ness customers before the Public Util.
tzed support like Boyle. He.ls a pro at the statt. Senate seat that Lloyd Dog.
sty Commissmn and the Texas Railroad dealing with the prbss and the Legisla-gett. Daustin. is gmng up to run for Cominission.
fin ture." ~
the t!S Senate lie hail not wnght the The otin e has t= en granted a
. Sotithwe' stern Be'!! spakesman Jarn touns!'s job but was secruited by
$65's.676 an u usi hudget - including Lydon saidl*We lookforward to work.
White.
ss7,.00 for Boyle's alar'. Boyle sa:d he ing with htra. andVe ple'dge our coop.
j
.lloyle said he gave up the Senate wants to hire a staff cf eight to 10 peo.
cration iin doing anything we can to r.s.
race because the public counse.I's job ple.
sist hisoffictr.". - 4j- - y
~.
n
UilITED STATES OF AMERICA flVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY Afl0 LICEf!SIrlG BOARD In the Matter of l
l APPLICATION OF TEXAS UTILITIES l
GErlERATING COMPANY, ET~AL. FOR Q
Docket Nos. 50-445 AN OPERATING LICENSE FOR Q
and 50-446
. COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC Q
STATION UtlITS #1 AND #2 (CPSES)
(
-CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE By my signature below, I hereby certify that true and correct copies of CASE'S MOTION REGARDIt!G 9/7/83 CONFERENCE CALL have been sent to'the names listed below this 3rd day of September
, 198_3.,
by: Express Mail where indicated by
- and First Class Mail elsewhere.
- Administrative Judge Peter B. Bloch Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., Chaiman U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board 4350 East / West Highway, 4th Floor U. S. fluclear Regulatory Commission Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Washington, D. C.
20555
- Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Dean Dr. W. Reed Johnson, Member
~
Division of Engineering, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Architecture and. Technology U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Oklahoma State University Washington, D. C.
20555 Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074 Thomas S. Moore, Esq., Member
- Dr. Walter H. Jordan Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board 881 W. Outer Drive U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Washington, D. C.
20555
- Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Debevoise & Liberman U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1200 - 17 th S t., N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20036 Docketing and Service Section (3 copies)
- Marjorie Ulman Rothschild, Esq.
Office of the ' Secretary Of fice of. Executive Legal Director, USNRC U. S. fluclear Regulatory Conmission Maryland National Bank Building Washington, D. C.
20555 7735 Old Georgetown Road - Room 10105 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Atomic Safety. and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
2055'
Certificate of Service Page 2
' David J. Preister, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Environmental' Protection Division Supreme Court Build.ing.
Austin, Texas 78711 John Collins Regional Administrator, Region IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission 611 Ryan Plaza Dr., Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Dr. David H. Boltz 2012 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 Lanny Alan Sinkin 838 East Magnolia Avenue San Antonio, Texas 78212 Mr. James Gagliardo Region IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Dr., Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011
&A' hf6 fPMrs.) Juanita Ellis, President CASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy) 1426 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 214/946-9446 9
9
_ _ _ _. _ _ _